Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
Sure you would experience the burn. The body you percieve would be part of the VR and it would burn just like the one you percieve in the VR you might currently be inhabiting.
I do find discussions like this fascinating but think we are debating semantic differences in language not yet fully defined as this area is emerging.
Language evolves and it evolves by design or just via common usage.
So I think the word 'Real' in this context and in this discussion will need to evolve as the technology evolves.
For instance there are certainly 'real' experiences within VR. We know also doctors can remove part of your skull and stimulate direct areas of your brain ot make you experience smells, tastes, etc. Those are real experiences.
However if you are dying of thirst, and instead of giving you a glass of water i immerse you in a VR world where you have abundant water and your body is then stimulated to not feel thirst pangs and you die from dehydration was that 'real' or an 'illusion'?
I say an illusion. But i also acknowledge illusions can have underlying real elements.
So in my view of the language (today) I would not call what happens in a VR simulation 'real'. I would say it has 'real' elements but to that is different than the experience as a whole (which is what I believe we are referring to when we say is the VR sim real?) being real.