Virtual Worlds

Okay. I am leaving on vacation Friday afternoon- tomorrow. I will have little to no internet access during that time, so I'll probably not be commenting. Please feel free to continue reading and writing.

When is the last time you had a nightmare? Standing there in the dream, were you conscious that it was a dream and that you would eventually wake up? This always baffles me on Blues Clues or something when Steve tells kids that, when having a bad dream, they can remember that it's only a dream and they'll snap out of it. This makes no sense because, in a dream, you have no idea it's just a dream. You think it's real.

Wait, though. You think this is real, too.

If you think both of them are real, one must be wrong. Is this a dream, and is the thing you think a dream, reality? Or a dream within a dream?

Or consider this: "The Matrix." I'll admit, I haven't actually seen it, but I know the basic plot. A man wakes up to discover that his entire life has been a virtual reality program designed by supersentient beings. Now he wakes up and realizes that everyone he has ever known and loved was a collection of circuitry.


This, frankly, terrifies me. What if- and a big if, but it's possible- what if this life is not as I know it? What if I am from another time and world, immersed in a huge virtual reality bubble that I cannot hope to crack before I reach certain ends. Yes, how does this game end? When I die, do I see a "game over" message along with an option to restart and play again, beginning from, I don't know, my last birthday? How would I ever discover if this is true? Stab myself? And would I have enough faith in this idea to do something like that that usually makes me flinch until I remember... all the rules have changed, and now I have no idea what they are.


Or, as was touched on in Dan's blog, what about video games? What if we are indeed immersed in a giant video game, being played and controlled by other beings who may not care about us? Is my DNA binary code? Is everyone I've spoken to an inanimate character, only there to help my player in his or her quest? What if my player doesn't know I'm conscious? What if they do something crazy and I die? What happens to me then? Will it hurt?

Rather pathetic, really. I'm grappling with questions of my very existence and I wonder whether dying will hurt.

But to continue... Rene Descartes (there's an accent mark over the last e in Rene) was a Frenchman who lived from 1595 to 1650. Although also reknowned for his work in math and science, Descartes is most famed for his work in philosophy. Even though he had written several books, he still had questions about what is and isn't real. Finally, he asked himself this: if some monstrously evil demon were tricking him about everything, if he made all his thoughts wrong, would there be anything he could be certain of?

The answer was one thing, but it's extraordinarily comforting. Ready?

Cogito ergo sum. I think, therefore I am.

To have thoughts that were able to tricked, for the demon to have something to deceive, Descartes would need to think. And because he thought, he had to exist. Thoughts don't come from things that don't exist.


Thus, I know I exist. You'll understand if I don't say that you exist because the whole point of this entry is that you very well might not exist.


Here's another idea. What if I am just a consciousness floating in space? What if nothing else in the entire universe exists but me, a disembodied consciousess desperately fabricating fantastic daydreams to comfort myself? Wonderful daydreams, with lovely smells, friends to talk to, and places to see? The body I have imagined for myself has plans, hopes, and fears, but my consciousness, somewhere out in the void, has none of that. With no one to interact with and no body to maintain, that being has nothing to do except immerse itself in insane daydreams. Haven't you ever done that? Imagined yourself as a different person with a different life and fallen in deeply? It's not so hard.


This idea of being the only thing in existence is called solipsism, and there's no way of disproving this that I can think of. Even if someone would sit me down and explain ernestly that they were, in fact, real, that wouldn't be convincing. Would a figment of your imagination admit that she doesn't exist? No. Exactly. If one of you can suggest something, some way to know for sure what is real, I would be forever grateful.


I exhale finally and turn back towards the kitchen. I know every detail of it by heart, and it is comfortingly familiar, so different from these imaginary realms I probe. How could all this that I have spent my whole life on not exist? There are cookies on the counter and I reach for one, instinctively caring for this frail body that might not even be real. You know, this world is pretty detailed and self-explanatory, and my instincts are reliable and consistent. Could it be? Might it be real? I suppose I'll never know, nor do I truly want to.

What do you think? What is real... and what is not?

Crime and Punishment

I recently read the book "Les Miserables," by Victor Hugo. The gist of it is, an ex-criminal called Jean Valjean does many good deeds that more than atone for his past crimes and current rulebreaking. However, a police officer known as Inspector Javert relentlessly hunts him- he is paid, after all, to bring criminals to justice. Through a series of unusual events, Javert finds himself as a prisoner of war, and Valjean is the one ordered to execute him. However, Valjean lets him go free, and soon after, Javert has Valjean captured. Javert, knowing that the legal punishment for Valjean's crimes is death, has no idea what to do. Which is correct- the law or human judgement? Is this always true?

Are laws one size fits all, as in "Don't use violence?" But then, wouldn't there be exceptions? In this example, should violence be permitted in self defense? Then again, if only both parties had followed the rule, there would be no need for self defense.

But human judgement, also, can be flawed or biased. No matter how many surveys you give, a jury will always be biased. However, in cases of such little bias as this, you would call that bias "experience." Judgement can be flawed depending even on such little things on whether or not someone is tired and their reasoning is impaired. In addition, what human trusts himself to deliver completely fair punishments? Do you want to be the one to assign a death sentence?

Laws are just human judgement on paper. They are the judgements of people we presumably trust and respect, but they are still theirs. Since every human is biased (if you weren't, would you even be human?), their laws are often imperceptibly biased as well.

Should a justice system be as clear cut as, for example "Stealing is a crime and the penalty is a $100 fine. Since you stole something, be it a candy bar or nuclear warhead, that is your punishment. End of story"? Or would it work better if someone sat down with all involved parties and got their story: their motives and past and personalities? Couldn't the person calling the shots be hoodwinked somehow, by a clever lie or personal feelings?

Please, give me your input. In a perfect world, how would punishments be decided: on a case-by-case basis or a clear-cut law?

Welcome to the Blog!

As some of you may know, this blog has been in the works for a while. I hope that you will read and comment to further your knowledge and ours, but please, let's keep it respectful. Ready? Onward!