Some believe that the universe is actually a simulation.

Just because something is a possibility doesn’t make it the case.

We can use critical thinking to consider expert perspectives before accepting a new idea as true.

As I mention often on this blog, I have a great interest in the universe—astrophysics, quantum mechanics, cosmology, all that stuff. With that, I’m no expert in any of it. I just enjoy reading and watching videos about it. Recently, I’ve found myself being fed the same headlines over and over again—that the universe is actually a simulation—an idea that’s been around a while, but really seems to be getting a push in my algorithm. I’ve even seen a few pieces argue for the increased likelihood that we live in a simulation in light of how many "scientists"/"experts" now believe it themselves. As I also often argue here, if most experts agree on something, then we should probably give them the benefit of the doubt when we’re not experts in that field. However, as critical thinkers, it is still up to us to confirm the credibility of this expertise and determine whether the experts actually do agree and believe it themselves, and so, that’s what I did here.

Background on the Simulation Argument

To begin, a little background—the simulation argument first started to take off in the early 2000s, when philosopher Nick Bostrom made the point that if a civilisation were to develop to the point where it could create a conscious simulation, it could generate them over and over. The "first" reality, or base reality, might create a second, and the second eventually create a third, and the third eventually a fourth, and so on (like a Russian nesting doll scenario). Thus, from a potentially infinite series of simulations, if you were to........

© Psychology Today