Virtual immortality

A friend raised a potential objection to my post on secular immortality. And that’s because there are different theoretical models of secular immortality. One version involves halting the aging process. But another version involves uploading consciousness into a virtual program. That eliminates some of the concrete social problems I mentioned. So what about that alternative?

i) It presupposes a highly contestable theory of the mind.

ii) It’s pure speculation–the stuff of science fiction. So we can cross that bridge if we come to it.

Still, ethical reasoning commonly deals with hypothetical scenarios, including science fiction scenarios, so we might play along with it for the sake of argument.

iii) If everyone is uploaded into the mainframe, then there’s no one outside the simulation to service the computer. In case of computer malfunction, the entire human race would immediately cease to exist. Instant mass annihilation.

iv) If some people exist outside the simulation to service the computer, then they enjoy godlike power over everyone inside the simulation. They could commit murder or genocide with impunity. Or toy with the virtual human minds. Manipulating the virtual environment at will, in a malicious experiment.

v) The physical world has objective features. Independent of human minds and desires. And that is part of what defines us. A reality check.

But if our minds were trapped in a collective simulation, isn’t that like a dream from which you never awake? As we lose touch with reality–as our initial anchorage in the remembered experience of the real world recedes ever further behind us, would we go mad?

Because our consciousness alternates between dreaming and waking, our waking states restore equilibrium. Restore a sense of continuity and objectivity.  

But if we were lost in a dream–or the virtual equivalent–would we slip into a state of insanity? Would our personal identity disintegrate in the solvent of an elastic, systematic illusion?