The argument structure equivocates between 'simulation' as logical reduction and 'simulation' as physical realizability, a distinction Turing himself acknowledged in his 1950 distinction between discrete and continuous machines.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Alan Turing(the philosopher/scientist being referenced): A British mathematician who pioneered computer science and artificial intelligence; he's famous for asking whether machines can think.
Continuous machines(Turing's 1950 distinction between types of machines): Machines that work with smooth, flowing changes rather than separate steps (like analog devices that gradually increase or decrease).
Discrete machines(Turing's 1950 distinction between types of machines): Machines that work with separate, distinct steps or values (like computers that use 1s and 0s), rather than continuous flowing changes.
Equivocates(describes a flaw in the argument being discussed): Uses the same word in two different ways to make an argument seem stronger than it actually is, which is a logical trick.
Logical reduction(one meaning of 'simulation' in the argument): Breaking down a complex problem into simpler logical pieces to see if something is theoretically possible.
Physical realizability(the other meaning of 'simulation' in the argument): Whether something can actually be built or created in the real, physical world (not just in theory).
knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.): Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

2 topics