I like the Matrix movies and have always wanted a Star Trek-style Holodeck, but the notion we are living in a simulation doesn’t work for me. For starters, it’s not even a new idea.  

“I think therefore I am,” René Descartes famously wrote. While the French philosopher’s quote is often repeated, many may not realize that Descartes, in a way, was tackling the Simulation Hypothesis in 1637 when he wrote it.

The gist of Descartes’ thinking was that the only thing anyone can be sure of is their own thoughts and mind. Right now, you could be dreaming, a demon could be tricking you into experiencing a fake world, or you may merely be a brain in a jar. All you can be certain of is your thoughts; you control those. Therefore, you know you’re real even if nothing else around you is. The general idea is known as Solipsism.

A fun Solipsistic line of questioning is whether or not you have a heart. You might feel it beating, but have you ever seen it? Held it? Couldn’t the beats you feel be an illusion? Until someone opens up your chest, you’ll never know for sure.

Simulation theorists might posit that since no one needs to see your heart right now, the universe saves processing power by not generating. Your innards will be procedurally generated when the surgeon opens you up, like how a video game works.

The video game analogy is at the heart of my issue with the Simulation Hypothesis – the idea of non-player characters (NPCs).

There’s a dark side to Solipsism called The Problem of Other Minds.

If all you can be certain of are your own thoughts, then you have no proof anyone else is conscious. They could be figments of your dream, puppets controlled by the demon, or some other thoughtless construct. One could even argue consciousness is a biological quirk not everyone is born with. This is called a Philosophical Zombie (p-zombie).

When poked, the p-zombie will feel no pain but react appropriately. It will speak when spoken to, and in all ways, it is indistinguishable from ordinary people. Yet, the p-zombie lacks consciousness. Your spouse, parents and strangers on the street could all be p-zombies, and you’d never know unless you can read minds to discover they have none.

Some use the p-zombie thought experiment to demonstrate that consciousness isn’t required. There could theoretically be a world where everyone is a p-zombie merely going through the motions – one does not need to be conscious to be.

For everyone not born a psychopath, p-zombies only exist within the context of thought experiments. Just because one can’t prove other people have thoughts and emotions doesn’t mean they don’t. People live rich, varied lives outside of what any individual “I” recognizes. It’s the kind of no-duh statement well-adjusted, rational people don’t need to have explained.

But suppose the world is like a video game, and video games are populated mostly by p-zombies known as NPCs. In that case, it’s perfectly logical that only the player characters — you and select others — have agency.

The notion some people are NPCs has become a meme. The history of the meme sparks from 4Chan and the natural anomaly that some people lack inner voices. We can see shades of the p-zombie in the meme’s background. The issue is that some people take the meme seriously, likely because they take the Simulation Hypothesis seriously.

The Simulation Hypothesis has thoroughly contaminated the cultural zeitgeist since philosopher Nick Bostrom first published his paper “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?” in 2003. Elon Musk has parroted the notion that the universe is a simulation, and the popularity of video games and films like The Matrix ensures that most people grasp the general concept that all of reality could be nothing more than 1s and 0s.

It doesn’t help that Bostrom frames the hypothesis in an either-or way. Bostrom argues at least one of the of the following propositions is true:

• The human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage.
• Any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof).
• We are almost certainly living in a computer simulation.

So, if, like Bostrom, you believe we live in a simulation, then it’s perfectly logical to think most people are NPCs. You can find many examples of people who take the idea seriously on social media.

Anyone who knows anything understands the danger of othering people. Propaganda thrives on turning people into others. Humans are inherently good and conflict-adverse, enjoying and valuing peaceful existences. So historically, to convince a group of people to attack another group, we other them. “Those people are savages who don’t hold the same morals as you – they’re barely even human.”

The idea that some people are NPCs normalizes a form of othering that any rational person should find disturbing. There’s a slippery slope from joking that a stranger on the street isn’t a person to treating them like they’re not. It’s one of the darker sides of the Simulation Hypothesis that I don’t see often talked about.

There are a lot of other problems with the Simulation Hypothesis and Bostrom’s ideas; I recommend checking out this episode of the Pod Only Knows podcast.

The sane philosopher knows that you check philosophy at the door of your office. You don’t carry p-zombies and Solipsism to the dinner table. Everyone viewing themselves as a player character in a world of NPCs ought to do the same. Simulation Hypothesis can be fun to ponder, but the person delivering your groceries and riding the elevator with you are people deserving of the same respect as yourself. They’re not NPCs; you’re not the main character.

If all you can be sure of are your own thoughts, why choose to think like an ass? Simulate a better personality for yourself.