I hold the philosophical position that if two things are indistinguishable, their difference is irrelevant.
"What if we live in a simulation?" -- irrelevant
"What if you couldn't tell the difference between taking to a computer and a real person?" -- irrelevant
But more precisely, it's begging the question to say "imagine something was indistinguishable, now how would you treat it differently???"
@hplisiecki if a tool exists to differentiate the indifferentiable, for example a microscope, I would treat the situations differently.
@nomi My toot related to the possibility of making such a tool. Its existence would have meant mean that it was differentiable already.
@hplisiecki hmm... I don't think it matters whether it is a possibility or not, only whether the tool has been built, calibrated, used, and understood. I'm tossing those extra words on after "built" because I think at the bottom, the nature of the difference is incredibly more important than the existence of a difference
@nomi Except that in order to buld, calibrate and so on, you first need the motivation to do it. That motivation has to stem from recognizing the relevance of the sought distinction and wanting to find out.
@hplisiecki generally agree. Small quibble: it comes from the belief a difference can be identified. Sometimes the belief ends up being true (higgs boson exists), sometimes not (aether doesn't).
@nomi It is the same with anything that can have no effect. "What I'd there are an infinite number of alternative universes that we cannot interact with?" Irrelevant.
On the other hand the question is always nor ever or just not yet? Is reality a simulation? Irrelevant until either the simulator decides to alter or end the simulation. Is it a computer or a human? Irrelevant so long as they truly are indistinguishable, but I would always have a suspicion that at some point I would discover a distinction.
I think the possibility that two things that are indistinguishable may not always remain so drives a lot of the debate on these topics.
@antares to your question of "ever or yet", I think the answer is that it only matters if you can differentiate it right now (whatever the relevant timeframe for taking action is).
At its core, it's a question of unknown unknowns. Suppose you are in 1450 and you're curious how the water in two cups is different. Could you even fathom microbes? Even if you could, it wouldn't be meaningful because it's fiction to you at that time.
@nomi that applies to many current social issues. Well said
@nomi I agree with this viewport and is why, as an atheist, I find the argument of a non-interventionist god even more infuriating than one who is constant performing miracles. If the existence or non-existence of a god makes no different to our reality then the whole idea is irrelevant and should be discarded.
@rlamacraft I hear you, and don't necessarily disagree. I would suggest that if there is no correct answer, then neither result is the wrong answer. So both stances are valid
@nomi my first thought was that it has to be relevant for ethical questions (ie do robots really feel pain). But then I realized that just not differentiating as long as you can't tell always seems like the best way to go.
@monotrox99 right! Like if it looks like pain, walks like pain, and you can't tell if it's not, then act like it is
@nomi I understand this position, but as you point out, the ability to distinguish between different things depends on our ability to perceive differentiating traits. However, the ability to perceive also depends on our interprative framework, which is to some degree under our control. Take Zhuangzi's dream for instance. He has a dream of being a butterfly that was so real he questions whether he is indeed a man dreaming of being a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming of being a man. Ultimately how he experiences reality is a choice he makes in that moment. Even our memories are subject to reinterpretation constantly and there have been quite a few studies done on people who's memories of important events change with time, or from outside influence. So the question becomes, whether two things are indistinguishable solely due to our interpretive framework and is there more utility in changing the way we view the situation or leaving the two things as indistinguishable?
@nomi What if you could devise a tool to distinguish these scenarios, or at least start a project to develop them?
Would their still be irrelevant in the current moment.
And if yes, then in what instances would you be sure that such a tool cannot be developed?