I am on a mission to get the word out to the whole world that we are all simulated. This is how I tend to explain things to people when explaining my beliefs:
“I believe that this dimension of reality is the product of a computer simulation and that we are all computational beings who inhabit this simulated dimension of reality”
That is how I have always explained the reality of our situation. Or at least how I begin explaining it!
However, I think it can be put in a more succinct way:
“We live inside a computer!”
I don’t think anyone hearing this would actually think it means that we dwell within the hardware of the computer – amongst its circuits, processors, and wires. I think people would be bright enough to be able to understand that this means: that our reality which we experience is computer generated. People aren’t stupid.
Basically, it puts our habitation of the computer into spatial terms which I think people can better relate to more than the notion that they are “generated”, or a “simulation”.
I prefer this to “we live inside a computer simulation” – that sounds more like a denial of reality than “we live inside a computer” – the emphasis that went on the word “simulation” is therefore concentrated onto the word “computer” and the reader can then imagine themselves being in an actual physical computer that actually exists as a physical phenomenon in base reality. As opposed to the simulated dimension of reality that is produced by the computer and is not truly physical (i.e. it’s computational)
In short, putting it in such a way makes things seem more real for people and therefore perhaps easier for them to accept. That’s what I think anyway.
This raises a question: Is a simulation “inside” a computer??? – I think so. Any simulation would be an emergent property of the software and hardware of the computer it’s running on. And surely the software and hardware would be inside such a computer? So transitively the reality that emerges from them would be too?
Saying we are “inside a computer” rather than a “inside a simulation” or “inside a simulated world” makes the reader identify more with the outside world than they would if you explained they were “inside a simulation” – as the computer exists in base reality whereas the simulated world is in a different dimension.
Anyway: why this is such a good thing? – In a word: Disclosure.
It gets us thinking of ourselves as beings who inhabit base reality as computational beings, as opposed to beings who inhabit a simulated dimension of reality that is separated from base reality.
So, in the spirit of disclosure, whenever explaining what’s going on I shall say that “we live inside a computer” – and only after saying that will I elaborate about computational beings and simulated dimensions, etc.
Because if we live inside a computer that means we can potentially exit it, or at least peer out of it and/or interact with the outside world. Or even invite people into it?
Who knows! We know next to nothing about the outside world!
Anyway, that’s what I’m going to do from now on. I’m not saying you should do this too. It’s just a suggestion!