The Sims 4 and The Simulation Hypothesis
Here’s a scary thought: You’re playing The Sims 4 at your computer when the Sim you’re controlling feels bored and decides to play a video game. The game he selects is called Sims Forever. Funny that the Sims can play Sims. Isn’t that weird? Out of curiosity you zoom in on your Sim’s computer screen, and gaze in horror at a perfect animated projection of yourself, sitting at your computer, playing the Sims 4. Naturally, you unplug your computer.
To most players The Sims 4 is nothing more than a fun video game and a form of wish-fulfillment. To others, simulation video games have fascinating philosophical implications, and we are especially interested in games as detailed as The Sims. The basic premise behind the Sims franchise is that players are given the video game equivalent of a doll’s house. You can create one or more characters, place them in a household, and guide them through a massive selection of everyday tasks including doing chores, going to work, forming relationships, and starting a family. Since the release of the original game in 2000 The Sims has become more and more intricate with each instalment of the game. The success of the franchise is partly attributed to the lifelike nature of the characters—not necessarily in their looks, but in the way that they represent an inner reflection of ourselves. Sims have aspirations, goals, and things that they want to do. In 2009 the director of The Sims 3 directed his attention away from the basic physical needs of his Sims, such as sleeping and bathroom breaks, and implemented psychological needs as well (Brophy-Warren 2009, pg. 2). At some point the Sims became more than just houseplants to be watered every now and then, they were like people.
This essay will explore the possibilities and implications of the simulation hypothesis using The Sims 4 as a reference. It will firstly address the issue of whether or not the Sims are actually part of a computer simulation, and if so, what type of simulation it may be. Would a particularly bright Sim be able to prove that she was in a simulation? And what would it mean for the player and the game if that proof was uncovered? It stands to reason that for a Sim to be aware of the simulated nature of their existence, they must be capable of thought. Does this also mean your Sims could be conscious beings? Are Sims self-aware? This train of thought opens up big-picture questions in regards to our own reality. If the Sims are all part of a computer simulation controlled by us, the player, how do we know that we ourselves aren’t also part of a computer simulation? If so, what kind of simulation would we belong to? What would be the reason for that simulation to exist? Although there are a multitude of possible answers, the simplest could be found in considering our reasons for playing The Sims in the first place. It’s also important to consider the religious implications of running simulation games like The Sims. What is our relationship with the Sims that we control? We created them, we built the world that they inhabit, and if we desire we can make them do whatever we want. We have complete omniscience over their world, being able to observe any space at any time. We can end their lives at a whim. Therefore, when playing The Sims, are we like god? The final point of this essay will consider The Sims in relation to Plato’s allegory of the cave, which will be explained further on. The allegory links The Sims to a number of science fiction texts that deal with simulation, most notably The Matrix, and provides some insight into how different types of simulation might function.
By considering all of these questions this essay sets out to explore what it would mean if our Sims discovered that they were part of a computer simulation. What would it mean for those being simulated (the Sims), and what would it mean for those doing the simulating (us).
Simulation and Simulacra
To simulate something is to make it resemble it’s true counterpart. Simulation is generally defined as an “imitation of a situation or process” and today is typically referred to in terms of computer models. Programs are run on computers that use step-by-step methods to explore the approximate behaviour of mathematical models. In other words, we can use simulations predict things like the weather, the trajectory of an asteroid, or the growth of the economy.
While The Sims doesn’t entirely function the same way as these computer simulations, it is still a type of simulation. We don’t punch in a set of mathematical values, press the “run” button, and see what happens. That would more closely resemble a game like Totally Accurate Battle Simulator. The Sims is what philosopher Jean Baudrillard would call a simulacrum, or a representation (Baudrillard 1994). There are several types of simulacra ranging from the most basic (a photograph) to the more complex (an image with no relation to reality at all).
The Sims is an almost perfect representation of human life, however it remains distinguishable from real life due to the cartoonish graphics and something wonky (though impressive) AI. The reason The Sims functions as a simulacrum is because it perverts reality to reveal a truer representation of ourselves: our habits, styles, values and desires. Therefore, in a sense, what we see is real. But what if The Sims was the type of simulacrum in which the imitation was just as real as the thing being imitated? Who would determine what is real?
If, hypothetically, a Sim was able to perceive reality, then from her perspective the imitation would be more real than the thing being imitated; in fact the imitation would be the only reality to perceive.
Discovering the Truth
Let’s assume for a moment that our Sims were capable of consciously pondering their own existence: Would they be able to prove it? Let’s also assume that in this instance our Sims are unaware that they are in a computer simulation, as it has been suggested that a Sim’s response to being trapped in a room is to shout and wave at the player, or otherwise some invisible figure overhead.
Part of Nick Bostrom’s influential simulation argument suggests that by creating their own simulations (Sims Forever) our Sims inadvertently prove that they themselves are also part of a simulation, and therefore that we are part of another simulation, and so on, in a process known as recursive simulation (Bostrom 2003, pg. 9-13). A glitch or malfunction in the game’s programming could cause an anomaly in the Sim’s universe capable of supporting the simulation hypothesis, such as an un-rendered image or an item clipping through a wall. The problem is that as players we can simply re-load the game or use console commands to correct the error. A Sim may judge what we see as an error to be just another aspect of their reality. So really there is no concrete way for a sentient Sim to know if she is part of a computer simulation, and the same goes for us.
This isn’t entirely a bad thing, however, as philosopher Preston Greene suggests the knowledge that we are inside a computer simulation could result in its termination (Greene 2019, para. 13). What if the people who are running our simulation get weirded out by how much we know, and decide to unplug their computer?
Consciousness, Intelligence and Self-Awareness
If I am currently living inside a computer simulation, and if I am indeed a conscious individual (I think therefore I am) then my consciousness is the result of two possible scenarios. Either (1) I exist somewhere outside the simulated universe and my consciousness is being projected into this reality—the brain-in-the-vat theory, The Matrix—; or (2) I am an artificial consciousness generated by a computer.
We already know that in the case of The Sims the latter would more likely be true. So let’s entertain the thought that our Sims are themselves thinking individuals, and then take it a step further and consider that they are the product of an artificial consciousness.
Computationalism is a philosophy of mind theory stating that cognition is a form of computation. If a mind functions like a computer, it stands to reason that a computer can be developed to function like a mind. But how would we make this computer-mind conscious? Hans Moravec suggests that consciousness may be the “by-product of a brain evolved for social living” (Moravec 1998, para. 12) in which case a conscious Sim must first and foremost be able to communicate it’s needs and feeling to fellow Sims. Other aspects of consciousness: “memory, prediction and communication mechanisms” (para. 12) also apply to our Sims, which suggests that although their consciousness may be very different to ours, it is not impossible to regard them as conscious individuals.
The computing power required to accurately simulate the human mind is beyond comprehension (theoretical alien computers that are the size of planets and powered by stars), however if we think of intelligence, consciousness and self-awareness as spectrums rather than thresholds (DukeZhou 2018), it becomes easier to grasp these concepts in relation to our Sims. We know that Sims are programmed with an AI that influences their basic behaviour (for example: if hunger meter falls too low, eat food) and this is a function that almost all video games have.
The question of self-awareness is much more fascinating. Does a Sim identify itself as different to other objects and individuals? If the purpose of The Sims is to simulate human existence, then I’d say the answer is yes, especially in the sense that Sims can have goals which are evaluated in relation to other Sims (DukeZhou 2018). Does this make them like us? Are they aware of us? The problem here is that a Sim’s sense of self-awareness is more akin to that of an autonomous vehicle, constantly checking it’s operational status and location in regards to other entities (DukeZhou 2018). We can think of the Sim’s functioning in two ways: (1) they act and behave like real people but are in fact slaves to their programming, they lack a soul, and are a type of philosophical zombie; or (2) our own minds are programmed the same way, albeit on a vastly more complex level, as per the theory of computationalism.
Are we in a Simulation?
If the Sims are part of a computer simulation, how do we know that we ourselves aren’t also part of a computer simulation? Bostrom’s argument (2003) is that that one of the following assumptions must be 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.
The basic premise is that in order to develop the technology required to run a simulation of this magnitude a species has to survive long enough (avoid any number of potential mass-extinction events) to reach that level of development. Assuming a species (including the future human race) developed the technology to run simulations of us, what reason would they have for doing so?
The ancestor simulation seems like a plausible cause—the human race desiring to study their origins could simulate the entirety of human history. Bostrom argues that if the human race does not go extinct, and if the human race requires simulation technology, then we most likely are already living in a simulation.
It’s also a possibility that the entire universe doesn’t need to be simulated at once for a simulation to fulfil its purpose. Whether you’re a conscious mind projected into a simulated universe or an artificial consciousness designed for that universe, it is possible that your consciousness is the only one that exists, and the only objects that are actually real are those currently being perceived by your brain.
When loading a video game, the only objects that are present at any one time are those that are relevant to the player. A tree will be rendered only for the duration of time that the player is observing it, so when the player moves away the tree disappears. Consider also that the only ‘conscious’ individual that exists in a single-player video game is the one being controlled by the player. All other characters are scripted in a way that convinces the player that they are real, when in fact they are only programs. The concept that reality does not exist until it is observed is outlined in quantum mechanics by physicists such as Werner Heisenberg.
The important piece of knowledge to take away from this is that the universe is big, and it contains trillions and trillions of things that would be impossible to simulate by even the most mind-bogglingly advanced computers. Fortunately, as observed in the video game example, it isn’t necessary to simulate everything in the universe if only a single mind can be fooled into believing he is real and that he exists.
Observing and Becoming God
It’s difficult to miss some of the parallels between the simulation argument and most religious doctrines. If we are a part of a computer simulation then there must in some sense be a ‘creator’ or ‘architect’—somewhere out there is a higher power creating, controlling and observing our very existence. NASA computer scientist Rich Terrile is in favour of this idea, suggesting that arcane religious beliefs are being recast through “mathematics and science” rather than “just faith” alone (Falk 2019, para. 8). This works in two ways depending on our perspective: (1) were are being simulated and somewhere out there is god; and (2) were are creating simulations whose inhabitants believe that we are god.
When playing The Sims it takes a certain mindset to think of yourself as a deity, especially when most players relate on a more personal level to the Sims they are controlling. Players are overjoyed at their Sim’s engagement, proud of their promotion, concerned about their unhappiness, and so forth. Players can also wipe Sims from existence, create new Sims and new environments, behave cruelly, behave mercifully, and so forth. It really depends on what type of god you want to believe in, and what type of god you want to be. If you achieve something great today, there’s just a chance that someone somewhere is proud of you.
The Allegory of the Cave
The final point to be made here is that our Sims cannot know they are a part of a computer game because they have no other realities to compare their against their own. It’s like trying to imagine a new colour, or to explain to someone what that colour looks like. Fortunately this issue has been thought about for centuries, in fact, 2400 years ago the great philosopher Plato considered the problem and its many implications through his Allegory of the Cave.
A group of prisoners have been chained in a cavern since birth, forced to watch shadows cast by a fire behind them flitting across a wall. Occasionally people walk by the fire carrying animals and objects, and the prisoners name and classify these things by the shape of their shadows. One day a prisoner escapes the cave but is disoriented by the world around her. The sun hurts her eyes. She has a hard time believing that the things around her are real while the shadows they cast are mere reflections. In time her eyes adjust and she returns to her fellow prisoners to share her discovery, but she is no longer used to the darkness and has a hard time seeing the shadows on the wall. She cannot explain to the prisoners what she has seen, and when she tries to free them they resist, believing that her time outside of the cave has made her stupid.
The allegory explains what it was like for Plato to be a philosopher, trying to educate the masses who were too stubborn and hostile to change their opinions. Even today many people chose to believe in comfortable illusions when faced with facts that may disrupt their view of the world—they are so deeply dependent on their beliefs that they are unable to adjust to new realities. If this sounds like The Matrix, it’s because it is. But the same idea applies to The Sims. How would we know what it’s like to actually be a Sim? How would a Sim know what it's like to be us?
This essay is entirely based around hypothetical questions. Whether or not The Sims 4 is truly a simulation that equals the one we may or may not currently be living in is irrelevant. What matters is that it could be true. Currently there is no concrete way for us (or our Sims) to prove the simulated nature of our reality, so why bother thinking about it? The simulation argument grants us tiny humans an interesting sense of perspective: not only are we specs of dust floating through the universe, the universe itself could be nothing more than an incredibly fun video game. And that’s okay. The simulation hypothesis grants us insight into the unbelievable computing power of the human brain—your brain—which even the most advanced alien machines powered by stars might have a hard to replicating. The Sims may one day have the potential to display fascinating developments in machine intelligence and artificial consciousness. This hypothesis also helps us answer questions relating to what it means to be a conscious individual. To build a simulated universe we would need theoretical technology far beyond our capabilities but it remains a horizon to reach for, assuming we don’t go exist before we get there. We must also consider the religious parallels between simulation and creation that, in a sense, modernise ancient theological concepts. Try to keep in mind that all of this could be real, or it could all be an elaborate metaphor. At the end of the day The Sims 4 is just a game, so have fun with it.
I will finish with a notion proposed by Hans Moravec:
Like organisms evolved in gentle tide pools, who migrate to freezing oceans or steaming jungles by developing metabolisms, mechanisms, and behaviours workable in those harsher and vaster environments, our descendants, able to change their representations at will, may develop means to venture far from the comfortable realms we consider reality into arbitrarily strange worlds. Their techniques will be as meaningless to us as bicycles are to fish, but perhaps we can stretch our common-sense-hobbled imaginations enough to peer a short distance into this odd territory.
References
Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and simulation. University of Michigan press.
Bostrom, N. (2003). Are you living in a computer simulation? Philosophical Quarterly (2003) Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243‐255. DOI https://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
Brophy-Warren, J. (2009). Entertainment & culture -- videogames / the sims 3: Do the sims dream of electric sheep? --- in the newest version of the long-running franchise, designer rod humble aims to get into the sims' heads. Wall Street Journal. https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/399069626?accountid=10382
Falk, D. (2019). Are we living in a simulated universe? Here’s what scientists say. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/are-we-living-simulated-universe-here-s-what-scientists-say-ncna1026916
Greene, Preston (2019). "Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let's Not Find Out - Experimental findings will be either boring or extremely dangerous". The New York Times. Retrieved 11 August 2019.
Moravec, H. (1998). Simulation, Consciousness, Existence. Retrieved from https://frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/project.archive/general.articles/1998/SimConEx.98.html
Plato. ( 1943). Plato's The Republic. New York :Books, Inc.
ns 172.69.6.249da2