"The Matrix" (De)Appreciation Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Locutus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thread
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the philosophical implications of "The Matrix" and its portrayal of reality as a simulation. Participants express varying views on the relevance of the film's themes, particularly the concept of a fabricated reality. Some argue that the idea of living in a simulation is irrelevant to daily life, as it does not alter personal experiences or existence. Others highlight the film's philosophical depth, suggesting it reflects ancient ideas, such as those found in Buddhism, about the illusory nature of reality.The conversation also touches on the potential for future technology to create indistinguishable virtual realities, raising questions about free will and the nature of existence. Some participants reference philosophical arguments, such as Descartes' "Evil Genius" and Bostrom's simulation argument, to explore the plausibility of living in a simulated world. However, there is a consensus that regardless of the nature of reality, it is essential to operate under the assumption that our experiences are real to progress as individuals and as a society.
  • #31
Originally posted by Mentat
True. And yet, I don't see how that answers the "free will" question. Yes, you could make all of the people's actions be programmed, and set; but, if that were so, no one would ever leave the Matrix (the agents wouldn't let them, and they (the people) would have no "will" to try it).

But users' idiosyncratic input historoies aren't programmed into VR simulations. What is programmed are the VR responses to possible inputs. This is precisely why a VR program that was as good as the Matrix would run into combinatorial explosion while trying to figure out how to respond to the user. There are just too many things that users can do, and the program has to react to all of them convincingly.

Also, how does one explain the fact that Neo bled (in the real world) after having hit the ground in the simulation? That questions been bothering me for a while.

That I don't know. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of feedback mechanism that the brain could use to cause internal bleeding if the brain was convinced that there was, in fact, bleeding. [?]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Originally posted by Psychodelirium
But users' idiosyncratic input historoies aren't programmed into VR simulations. What is programmed are the VR responses to possible inputs. This is precisely why a VR program that was as good as the Matrix would run into combinatorial explosion while trying to figure out how to respond to the user. There are just too many things that users can do, and the program has to react to all of them convincingly.

Do you mean that a computer has to be ready to handle all possible actions at any given time? This was my point, and I just don't see how it could be done. But, then again, I guess future technologies will allow for something like that.

That I don't know. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of feedback mechanism that the brain could use to cause internal bleeding if the brain was convinced that there was, in fact, bleeding. [?]

Well, actually, it would have to (somehow) sever many layers of his flesh.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
62
Views
10K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
32K
Replies
28
Views
8K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K