Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy
- Downloads：5623
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2022-02-22 06:51:52
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：David J. Chalmers
- ISBN：0393635805
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Virtual reality is genuine reality; that’s the central thesis of Reality+。 In a highly original work of “technophilosophy，” David J。 Chalmers gives a compelling analysis of our technological future。 He argues that virtual worlds are not second-class worlds， and that we can live a meaningful life in virtual reality。 We may even be in a virtual world already。
Along the way， Chalmers conducts a grand tour of big ideas in philosophy and science。 He uses virtual reality technology to offer a new perspective on long-established philosophical questions。 How do we know that there’s an external world？ Is there a god？ What is the nature of reality？ What’s the relation between mind and body？ How can we lead a good life？ All of these questions are illuminated or transformed by Chalmers’ mind-bending analysis。
Studded with illustrations that bring philosophical issues to life， Reality+ is a major statement that will shape discussion of philosophy， science， and technology for years to come。
Along the way， Chalmers conducts a grand tour of big ideas in philosophy and science。 He uses virtual reality technology to offer a new perspective on long-established philosophical questions。 How do we know that there’s an external world？ Is there a god？ What is the nature of reality？ What’s the relation between mind and body？ How can we lead a good life？ All of these questions are illuminated or transformed by Chalmers’ mind-bending analysis。
Studded with illustrations that bring philosophical issues to life， Reality+ is a major statement that will shape discussion of philosophy， science， and technology for years to come。
Reviews
Roo Phillips
，
If you are interested in understanding the arguments for the idea that we live in a simulated universe， then this is the perfect book to read。 I really respect Chalmers as a philosopher， the book is well written， and I think he makes the best case for the simulated universe that I have heard。 That said， it fell short from fully convincing me。 What Chalmers did do， however， is show that I should at least take the possibility seriously， and it is not inconceivable that we currently live in a simul If you are interested in understanding the arguments for the idea that we live in a simulated universe， then this is the perfect book to read。 I really respect Chalmers as a philosopher， the book is well written， and I think he makes the best case for the simulated universe that I have heard。 That said， it fell short from fully convincing me。 What Chalmers did do， however， is show that I should at least take the possibility seriously， and it is not inconceivable that we currently live in a simulation。 The one concept that Chalmers didn't cover as well as I would've hoped is the fundamental reason why he believes we live in a simulation: the odds are in favor of it。 His belief is based almost entirely on the fact that the math shows that it is far and away the most statistically likely place we could find ourselves。 That being so crucial to the rest of the story， I was a bit underwhelmed by his calculations。 Although the odds seem to make our simulation plausible， I felt like he should've spent more effort on conveying how。 Regardless， it was a fun and thought provoking read。 。。。more
Zarathustra Goertzel
，
Reality+ is an exploration of the meaning of "reality" as a concept。I hadn't known that "virtual reality" in essence means "having the virtues of reality" （yet somehow not quite being "reality" as typically conceived）。The discussion of the Simulation Hypothesis is fairly reasonable。 I appreciate the connection to older philosophies that we fundamentally cannot know the base nature of reality -- though David Chalmers claims we can estimate the likelihood that our layer of reality adheres to certa Reality+ is an exploration of the meaning of "reality" as a concept。I hadn't known that "virtual reality" in essence means "having the virtues of reality" （yet somehow not quite being "reality" as typically conceived）。The discussion of the Simulation Hypothesis is fairly reasonable。 I appreciate the connection to older philosophies that we fundamentally cannot know the base nature of reality -- though David Chalmers claims we can estimate the likelihood that our layer of reality adheres to certain structural laws （which， I believe， requires adopting an Occam's prior and some other assumptions）。 I don't quite buy that this cuts the Gordian knot 🤔😋。 One point I'd have liked to see explored more is the fact that our phenomenal worlds are already "simulations" of sorts in our brain for our best theories indicate we do not see reality "as is"。 This seems to present an additional view to the idea that it's "simulations all the way down" -- or at least， insofar as there are beings with phenomenally bound minds of similar stature to our own， there are simulations。The discussion of "digital objects" being in causal relations with each other was quite a good analogy to how the fundamental nature of "reality" and its information/laws does not have to be so aligned with the abstraction layer via which we as "real" macro-scale life forms interact。 Yes， digital objects are "real" in many virtues of the word。If a deepfake is indistinguishable from the "real" thing， does it matter？ If a "fake" interview with David Chalmers is thoroughly convincing， maybe what I actually value in the interview does not depend on deeper essences of what it is to be David Chalmers and only "interesting thoughts， discussions， and analysis in the style of David Chalmers"。 While this can be 'uncanny'， it's good food for thought。The topic of "can there be consciousness in a digital world" probably won't convert skeptics。 Yes， gradual uploading is probably a prudent approach to try。 I think a lot of the core ideas can port to various scenarios with less-than-perfect simulations。 AR virtual objects， implants projecting info-thought-forms into your brain directly， etc。 Will we need quantum computers and will world simulations be more like "firewalled bubbles of reality"？ A lot still applies， I'd hypothesize。More or less， virtues and the good life in a virtual world apply as in "this real world"。 Do we worry digital objects are ephemeral？ So are sakura blossoms fluttering down in the wind on a sunny day。 Depending on how we manage it， digital data can be more or less lasting。 Especially relevant to the "in-world" view 。 。 。 😛The good point is made that our language is not calibrated for discussing referents in different realities。 I use "tree" to refer to both Earth trees and Second Life trees。 If there's a popular mod that alters objects for a group of users， those effects are "really present" for them。 The discussion of analyzing causality in terms of counterfactuals （essentially material implication） is a bit weak， IMO。David Chalmers talks of the Garden of Eden as the "world simulation of people who believe in a form of naive realism" in which red is simply red rather than a phenomenal experience associated with light of wavelengths in the range from 630nm to 700nm。 And likewise for all of our more nuanced， structural theories of reality xD。 Simulation Theology and its unification with mathematical theories of reality will then take us further from living in a world of naive realism。All-in-all， I found the book rather fun ;- ） 。。。more
Plexiform Identity
，
Abstract & speculative at times。Challenging at times as philosophy is not my bread and butter but interesting to have such discussions。 Reality is in the brain/simulator of the beholder/simulating generating machine。
Narong Atsawasuranat
，
ความจริงเสมือนคือความจริงแท้เช่นกัน โต๊ะ， แมว， ต้นไม้ ใน VR ก็ถือเป็นความจริงไม่ใช่ภาพลวงตา ชีวิตใน VR สามารถดีได้พอๆกับชีวิตนอก VR โลกที่เราอยู่ก็อาจเป็นโลกเสมือนด้วยซ้ำไป ผู้เขียนใช้วิธีถามคำถามทางปรัชญาเกี่ยวกับเทคโนโลยีและใช้เทคโนโลยีเพื่อช่วยตอบคำถามทางปรัชญาดั้งเดิม โดยใช้ตัวอย่างจากภาพยนตร์ เช่น The Matrix， The True Man Show， Free Guy ใครดูมาแล้วก็จะนึกภาพตามได้ง่ายหน่อย รวมถึงพวกเกม VR， AR ต่างๆ อ่านจบคิดว่าไม่ถูกก็ผิดทั้งเล่ม สงสัยได้แต่คงไม่มีคำตอบ
David Barrie
，
Worth reading this just for the ground it captures， but it feels like an over-long essay in nudging naysayers into some kind of belief。 When in some countries one in two people play video games， many of whom find security， comfort and meaning in immersive environments， I'm not sure we need to be convinced that virtuality is reality - or assume that our culture remains determined by old school humanities teachers。 Might have been more interesting to have started the book with how the death of phy Worth reading this just for the ground it captures， but it feels like an over-long essay in nudging naysayers into some kind of belief。 When in some countries one in two people play video games， many of whom find security， comfort and meaning in immersive environments， I'm not sure we need to be convinced that virtuality is reality - or assume that our culture remains determined by old school humanities teachers。 Might have been more interesting to have started the book with how the death of physicality， absence of history and a world of deepfake virtual realities will impact upon the meaning of life。 。。。more
Ally
，
Reality+ is a "deep dive" into a topic I didn’t know a lot about， but was utterly interested in learning more about。 I had first read an op-ed piece in the NY Times about Chalmers most recent work & went to pick up the book almost immediately at a local bookstore。 Prior to starting the book， I thought it would be a take on more of the negatives of the virtual world， but was rather an examination of the positives of virtual reality， from a philosophical perspective。 There was also a discussion， f Reality+ is a "deep dive" into a topic I didn’t know a lot about， but was utterly interested in learning more about。 I had first read an op-ed piece in the NY Times about Chalmers most recent work & went to pick up the book almost immediately at a local bookstore。 Prior to starting the book， I thought it would be a take on more of the negatives of the virtual world， but was rather an examination of the positives of virtual reality， from a philosophical perspective。 There was also a discussion， from my understanding， that we are already living in a virtual world （or could be）。 By taking into account the theories of Decartes， Plato， Aristotle; we see life and reality and consciousness from different perspectives。 Generally， I give books about 50 pages before I decide to walk away。 I stuck with this book， but it did take me about 200 pages to get really enthralled in the material。 Perhaps this was becuase the language was so foreign to me， and the discussion about simulations and simulated societies was so lengthy。 I took a lot of notes while reading this book- and have points that I want to go back and reference。 The first 200 pages read more like a textbook and is very dense。 As it moves forward， it gets more compelling， as topics delved into include: reality （how we define reality）， mind & value （how do we assign value to things/life）？ I found the chapter 16 titled “does augmented reality extend the mind” to be very compelling。 We are already using our phones （note sections to jot down notes to remember that are significant） and google to “extend” our knowledge base。 In that sense， technology is already so deeply embedded into our society that it is difficult to seperate。 Just like the invention of the gutenberg printing press， which revolutionized the way in which we can obtain information and view the written word， phones also have changed the way we obtain information， and it isn’t necessarily a negative change。 Although I could understand Chalmers arguments in a variety of ways， I don’t know that I completely agree with his take on virtual worlds。 I do believe that life on earth， in a non virtual reality， is best。 Chalmers has gotten me to stop and analyze “why do I believe this to be true。” And for that， I am thankful。 After finishing all 466 pages of the book， I give it a solid 4 stars。 Non fiction work and excellently structured。 。。。more
Richard Thompson
，
From the point of view of either philosophy or theory of computing， I thought that this book was only B+。 It touches lightly on the main issues with a readable and comprehensible style， but there is a lot more depth to plumb on both sides of the equation that is not to be found here。 However， there were two things that I really liked。First， the basic idea of doing a philosophical analysis of issues pertaining to virtual reality is great fun。 There is a lot to think about here， so even though Mr。 From the point of view of either philosophy or theory of computing， I thought that this book was only B+。 It touches lightly on the main issues with a readable and comprehensible style， but there is a lot more depth to plumb on both sides of the equation that is not to be found here。 However， there were two things that I really liked。First， the basic idea of doing a philosophical analysis of issues pertaining to virtual reality is great fun。 There is a lot to think about here， so even though Mr。 Chalmers just got me starting to think， he did do that， and I have continued to turn over in my mind some of the issues that he brings up days after I finished the book。 It's a subject that is fun to think about and that has many nuances that make it defy easy answers。Second， unlike most of the philosophy books that I read， Mr。 Chalmers "does philosophy" in a way that is interesting and practical -- he uses philosophical methods to analyze and discuss problems that all of us can grasp and have thought about at least in passing。 It reminded me of the philosophy discussions that I have with my friend Harvey that always enrich my day when we get together。 It's not something that is so obtuse and abstracted that it makes you shrug and wonder why they bother as is the case with a lot of philosophical writing。On a substantive level， I'm ready to believe some of Mr。 Chalmers' propositions， not others。 For example， I agree that it is useful to look at virtual reality as being a form of actual reality。 It involves some definitional sleight of hand and is a bit circular， but I found it to be a useful construct that reveals some truth。 I'm also prepared to believe that we could be living in a simulation， though I think that we probably do not， and I found Mr。 Chalmers' arguments that we probably do unpersuasive。 My biggest complaint against him is that he purports to give probabilities for things that it seems to me could be true， but about which so little can be definitely said that any attempt to put numerical probabilities on them is false。 And I don't think that he deals adequately with the argument that certain known processes in our universe could not be mathematically modeled with any computer no matter how fast。 Of course you can say that the puppet master of the simulation has built our world with something fundamentally different than a computer， but then the argument just becomes an appeal to God or magic。 It could be true， but we can only judge it as a matter of faith， not science。 。。。more
Griffin
，
Terribly repetitive， speculative， and overall underwhelming for what could have been a very thoughtful， investigative book。 I never leave reviews; that's how disappointed I am。 Terribly repetitive， speculative， and overall underwhelming for what could have been a very thoughtful， investigative book。 I never leave reviews; that's how disappointed I am。 。。。more
Marks54
，
It is challenging to try to keep up with the author of this book - and I likely was not able to。This is a book arguing that we are likely participants in a simulation rather than the base reality that most of us assume that we are living。 Think about that …。 I saw the Matrix movies， even the new one， and thought one of them presented life as a simulation。 I saw “The Thirteenth Floor”。 I even read “The Anomaly” about the French airplane。 So is there something to these modern version of the questi It is challenging to try to keep up with the author of this book - and I likely was not able to。This is a book arguing that we are likely participants in a simulation rather than the base reality that most of us assume that we are living。 Think about that …。 I saw the Matrix movies， even the new one， and thought one of them presented life as a simulation。 I saw “The Thirteenth Floor”。 I even read “The Anomaly” about the French airplane。 So is there something to these modern version of the question of what reality is and whether we are living it。 Professor Chalmers argues that we are likely in a simulation - or that we very likely could be。 I do not believe that， but I am not quite sure why。This is a well written effort and merging metaphysics， epistemology， and information theory。 It brings to mind “Godel， Escher， Bach” by Douglas Hofstaeder from 1985， although Reality+ is much more ambitious （and perhaps less successful）Why not a 5？ I am not sure I am up to speed on all of the arguments。 They sure seem plausible， but there are lots of presumptions behind the logical links here。 In particular， there is a combination of logic with statistical reasoning involved in the core lines about the generation of lots and lots of simulations and I am not sure at all about the tightness of the links， I am not quite sure that social scientists make the same sorts of logical claims that philosophers do。 I need to go back and take another look。 There are wide differences on matters of choice and design and it is not convincing to me the spinning out new worlds of simulations that parallel our world is reasonable。 I need to take another look and do not catchup reading。It is a really good book， whether I end up agreeing or not and is well worth reading。 。。。more
Max
，
That was fun！ A good intro to a lot of relevant philosophical problems。 Maybe the best philosophy book that I have read so far。
Jakob Sønstebø
，
I had fun with it， although I was hoping to be more surprised than I ended up being。 Much of it can be summarized by Chalmers just extending the word "real" slightly to also encompass virtual objects that behave similarly to their physical counterparts in some relevant way。 Interestingly， this extension was done mainly through an investigation of the implications of the simulation hypothesis， something I found that to be a surprisingly fruitful way of sneaking up on the problem of virtual worlds I had fun with it， although I was hoping to be more surprised than I ended up being。 Much of it can be summarized by Chalmers just extending the word "real" slightly to also encompass virtual objects that behave similarly to their physical counterparts in some relevant way。 Interestingly， this extension was done mainly through an investigation of the implications of the simulation hypothesis， something I found that to be a surprisingly fruitful way of sneaking up on the problem of virtual worlds。 The investigation also involved some interesting observations about God as a simulator and certain Cartesian-dualism-compatible scenarios。The book is quite long and eventuality ended up being sort of a tour of many different areas of philosophy seen through the lense of virtual worlds。 This might be a bit annoying to people who already know this stuff， but I didn't， and so I found this aspect of it to be largely helpful and it made me want to read more。 。。。more
Ryan Boissonneault
，
The simulation hypothesis states that， as civilizations advance， they develop the capability to simulate entire worlds， and once they do， they will create hundreds or even thousands of them。 With hundreds or thousands of simulations running， the number of individuals within simulations will far outnumber non-simulated individuals in the universe。 And if that’s the case， then it’s more likely that you exist within a simulation than in a non-simulated world。 Therefore， it’s reasonable for you to b The simulation hypothesis states that， as civilizations advance， they develop the capability to simulate entire worlds， and once they do， they will create hundreds or even thousands of them。 With hundreds or thousands of simulations running， the number of individuals within simulations will far outnumber non-simulated individuals in the universe。 And if that’s the case， then it’s more likely that you exist within a simulation than in a non-simulated world。 Therefore， it’s reasonable for you to believe that this has already happened， and that you currently inhabit a simulation。 Some people， like David Chalmers， believe that this argument should be taken seriously。 While Chalmers doesn’t claim to know we are living in a simulation， he does think it’s a serious possibility， enough so to write an entire book about the prospect and what it means for the future of our VR and augmented reality technologies。I， for one， do not find the simulation hypothesis to be persuasive。 I explain this in great detail in my article Why We Are Probably Not Living in a Computer Simulation。 While I might ultimately be living in a simulation， and I can’t prove that I’m not， this is not the same thing as making the claim that it is reasonable for me to suppose that I am， especially without any convincing evidence。 In the article， I try to give all the reasons why the simulation hypothesis need not be taken seriously。 But for now， I can say that the argument makes a few critical mistakes: （1） it inappropriately shifts the burden of proof， （2） it incorrectly assumes that knowledge requires certainty， and （3） it seriously underestimates the difficulty involved in creating simulations of entire worlds with conscious inhabitants。Chalmers makes all of these mistakes in his latest book， Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy。 The problem for the reader is， if you don’t find the simulation hypothesis to be persuasive， you’re not going to find the rest of the book to be very persuasive （or， at times， very interesting） either。 If you do find the simulation hypothesis to be persuasive， however， you will learn more about its implications than you ever could have imagined。Despite disagreeing with Chalmers， I did find his arguments to be well presented and thought-provoking nonetheless。 Chalmers uses the simulation hypothesis—along with VR technology—to introduce the full spectrum of philosophical problems ranging from the nature of reality， knowledge， and values to the deepest questions we can ask about the mind， language， science， religion， and politics。 It’s a fascinating journey and an interesting spin on the problems of philosophy， but in the end， in my mind， it’s an ultimately misguided one。 。。。more
Brian Clegg
，
Thanks to major IT companies putting a lot of time and effort into it （not to mention changing their company names）， virtual reality is rarely out of the news at the moment。 So it's timely that David Chalmers should attempt an exploration of the nature of virtual reality。 What he sets out to persuade us is that 'virtual reality is genuine reality'。 That virtual worlds don't have to be illusory， the objects within virtual worlds are real， life can be good and meaningful in a virtual world and tha Thanks to major IT companies putting a lot of time and effort into it （not to mention changing their company names）， virtual reality is rarely out of the news at the moment。 So it's timely that David Chalmers should attempt an exploration of the nature of virtual reality。 What he sets out to persuade us is that 'virtual reality is genuine reality'。 That virtual worlds don't have to be illusory， the objects within virtual worlds are real， life can be good and meaningful in a virtual world and that the simulation hypothesis - the idea that what we usually think of as reality could itself be virtual， while not provable could be true。I became a little wary early on as Chalmers is clearly a virtual reality enthusiast: he tells us he has 'numerous virtual reality systems' in his study。 This is not normal。 You might think from all the hype that everyone except you is an inhabitant of virtual worlds， but it's still a pretty small minority - around the 1 per cent mark in the UK - and there highly focussed on young gamers。 Until the whole business is far less cumbersome and more high quality， I can't see it becoming mass market。 （Remember when everyone was supposed to be watching 3D TV within a few years。 That went well。）However， while I don't agree with Chalmers on the idea that VR will soon be ubiquitous， I was still interested to see his arguments。 Unfortunately， they turned out to be classic waffly philosophical ones。 There was never any convincing evidence， for example， that VR was in any sense real - in the sense， for example， that without necessarily being able to vocalise it， we know what reality is and it should not be capable of being switched off。 In a sense this issue reflects the nature of philosophy。 I can define an object in a way that requires it to be made of atoms: quite clearly then it is not true that objects in virtual reality are real。 That doesn't make me right - but equally it can't be countered。I'll be honest， I found the constant philosophical noodling tedious - this is real 'how many angels can dance on the head of a pin' territory。 （Funnily enough， there is little evidence much time was ever spent discussing angels and pinheads in reality - by which I don't mean virtual reality。） Because of the VR context I had expected more scientific basis for the content， but there was very little that went beyond attempts at proof by argument rather than evidence。 The handwaving felt distinctly frustrating， but I suppose it's the nature of philosophy。Chalmers had an interesting idea to explore virtual reality's relationship with true reality - and the book is worthwhile because of that - but I didn't feel I had learnt much at the end of its 450+ pages。 。。。more
Owlseyes
，
https://www。theguardian。com/books/202。。。"Reality+ — looking forward to life in the metaverseDavid Chalmers’ rich and occasionally outlandish work of ‘technophilosophy’ argues that virtual reality is genuine reality"in:https://www。ft。com/content/e9d4875c-0。。。David Chalmers: “I long to come back every 100 years to take a look”The techno-philosopher on why life may be a simulation。in:https://www。newstatesman。com/science-。。。 https://www。theguardian。com/books/202。。。"Reality+ — looking forward to life in the metaverseDavid Chalmers’ rich and occasionally outlandish work of ‘technophilosophy’ argues that virtual reality is genuine reality"in:https://www。ft。com/content/e9d4875c-0。。。David Chalmers: “I long to come back every 100 years to take a look”The techno-philosopher on why life may be a simulation。in:https://www。newstatesman。com/science-。。。 。。。more
Diane Hernandez
，
Is virtual reality genuine reality？ Are we all living in a simulated reality right now？ Is it possible to lead a life in a virtual world that is just as good， or better， than “real life”？ In Reality+， a philosopher explains his thoughts on these and six other common philosophical questions in our current computer-enhanced world。I love a book that makes me stop reading and ponder what I just read。 This book does this multiple times。 The author takes complex ideas and breaks them down for non-brai Is virtual reality genuine reality？ Are we all living in a simulated reality right now？ Is it possible to lead a life in a virtual world that is just as good， or better， than “real life”？ In Reality+， a philosopher explains his thoughts on these and six other common philosophical questions in our current computer-enhanced world。I love a book that makes me stop reading and ponder what I just read。 This book does this multiple times。 The author takes complex ideas and breaks them down for non-brainiacs。 Using pop culture references and cartoon illustrations allows everyone to understand his points。If you are a gamer and/or loved The Matrix， you need to read this book。 It will change the way you view the world。 Reality+ also has some brilliant plot ideas for science fiction authors too。 5 stars and a favorite！Thanks to W。W。 Norton & Company and NetGalley for a copy in exchange for my honest review。 。。。more
Quan Le
，
Chalmers did an excellent job presenting historical philosophical problems through a new lenses in hopes of presenting solutions in modern and future technology！ The book is very beginner friendly while still maintaining philosophical complexity
Kristine
，
Reality+ by David J。 Chalmers is a free NetGalley ebook that I read in late December。Just a day or so after watching Matrix Resurrections， I began to read this book， which goes way deeply into what characters from the movie might've mentioned in passing or experienced as just another aspect of the Matrix， like seamless， tangible virtual interactions and realities different than our own， questions that need to be addressed when thinking about if one person's view of the world is real or an illusi Reality+ by David J。 Chalmers is a free NetGalley ebook that I read in late December。Just a day or so after watching Matrix Resurrections， I began to read this book， which goes way deeply into what characters from the movie might've mentioned in passing or experienced as just another aspect of the Matrix， like seamless， tangible virtual interactions and realities different than our own， questions that need to be addressed when thinking about if one person's view of the world is real or an illusion， and keeping parts of yourself for yourself without divulging everything and the full extent of your persona online。 。。。more
CB_Read
，