I think, therefore I game: The philosophy of video games

Quote : Weekend Warrior

Gerald Jackson48 said:Man, my college mentor used to think reading books was kind of a joke, too. Whenever we told him we were reading up on a specific topic, he’d tell us to stop wasting our time with books and stick strictly to peer-reviewed journals. His logic was that by the time someone actually compiles and publishes a serious book on a subject, years have passed and half the info is already outdated because of new discoveries.

So, acting like books are "serious" while dismissing other ways of learning feels a bit elitist. Honestly, it might even be the wrong way to look at it.

This is pretty interesting. 👍

I mean, honestly? They might actually be right.

Lucky for me, I’m out here grinding through philosophy books purely out of love and boredom—kind of like how Victorian girls used to sit around knitting tapestries or whatever. It's the only way I can justify wasting my time on this stuff.

I totally get what my mentor is driving at—it’s that constant race against the clock. By the time I finally grind through some massive, brain-melting tome like *critique of pure reason* or spend weeks trying to actually deconstruct a philosopher’s entire life work, the world has already moved on. New articles drop, papers fly out, ideas start popping up everywhere—and before you can even wrap your head around one concept, it’s already slipped through your fingers. It's a hell of a cycle.

Look, let’s be real—to churn out all those papers, you’d assume there’s actually some reading behind them. But who knows? Maybe there isn't even any substance there. It could just be one person getting "inspired" by someone else's article and writing their own piece based on that—a giant chain reaction where nobody has actually cracked open a single book. 🤷

ruggedraven36 said:It’s just a game run through software built into a computer.

What are we actually doing while playing?

We feed input data to the program via physical movement—think controller buttons or mouse clicks—and our senses pick up the output, which lets us manage all those interactive elements that depend on us.

Is there any actual value in playing games?

Video games are worthless. Honestly, they’re pretty bad for kids—they pull them away from real-world play and everything else matters too.

Where does philosophy fit into video games?

Nowhere.

What exactly is...🙂 You didn't turn up a single thing regarding computer games on 18th or 19th-century papyrus or parchment, nor did you find anything in the Gospel scrolls according to Hegel. So, I suppose reductionism is all that's left on the table now. Fine. Have it your way.

So, has anyone else here actually sunk their life away playing "civilization"?

Joseph Murphy10 said:It’s really not that simple. Just as a thought experiment—let's say we all ditch the digital world for five days, kill our phones, cut the Wi-Fi, and just go work outdoors or read some books.

We're talking about the same stuff here.

Giving up isn't just part of being human.

I’m not sure if we’re totally on the same page—the core elements of gaming are freedom and fun. That ability to just hop in and out whenever you want? That’s exactly what separates a game from a chore or actual life.

The "fun" part is a bit more nuanced, but even when things get pretty brutal, the assumption is that you're having a blast—otherwise, why would you even be playing?

Then there's everything else—psychology, how it's applied, the consequences... but most of the time, we're pretty good at keeping reality and fantasy separate.
And yeah, anything can be misused, I guess.

gentlerider7 said:So, has anyone else here actually sunk their life away playing "civilization"?

Yeah, definitely.

I honestly don't have a spare second to jump into this right now, so I'll catch up with everyone a bit later.

Gerald Jackson48 said:Too much of anything is bad, including video games, though I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with them.

When you talk about swapping "real" life for virtual worlds, even Slavoj Žižek mentioned how he’d escape the world by burying his nose in books as a kid. It's not just a video game or movie thing.

I don't have tons of free time for gaming lately since I'm stuck dealing with "real" life—you know, work, paying bills, and all that. Honestly, I'm not sure if this "real" reality is actually any better than gaming, but it's what I've got to do right now, lol.

If I manage to find a spare moment, though, I had my eye on this one on Steam, especially since Cyberpunk 2077 was such a massive letdown for me. 😁

Detroit: Become Human

Tried the Detroit: Become Human demo—pretty interesting stuff. If you're looking for an alternative to Cyberpunk, Deus Ex is actually a solid choice. 🙂

gentlerider7 said:So, has anyone else here actually sunk their life away playing "civilization"?

Yeah, that was one of my absolute favorites growing up, along with Heroes of Might and Magic. 😁

Joseph Murphy10 said:Quote : Weekend Warrior

This is pretty interesting. 👍

I mean, honestly? They might actually be right.

Lucky for me, I’m out here grinding through philosophy books purely out of love and boredom—kind of like how Victorian girls used to sit around knitting tapestries or whatever. It's the only way I can justify wasting my time on this stuff.

I totally get what my mentor is driving at—it’s that constant race against the clock. By the time I finally grind through some massive, brain-melting tome like *critique of pure reason* or spend weeks trying to actually deconstruct a philosopher’s entire life work, the world has already moved on. New articles drop, papers fly out, ideas start popping up everywhere—and before you can even wrap your head around one concept, it’s already slipped through your fingers. It's a hell of a cycle.

Look, let’s be real—to churn out all those papers, you’d assume there’s actually some reading behind them. But who knows? Maybe there isn't even any substance there. It could just be one person getting "inspired" by someone else's article and writing their own piece based on that—a giant chain reaction where nobody has actually cracked open a single book. 🤷

I still think there have to be some books involved. It's pretty hard to dodge that.

Especially with philosophy, since it deals with timeless stuff. But certain scientific fields—the ones moving at lightning speed with constant shifts—tend to focus way more on what's happening right now or in the recent past. It’s simple. So much is happening so fast. New hypotheses pop up constantly, theories get updated, and it never stops.

You can't exactly write an enthusiastic paper about a theory from 2008 if it got totally debunked in 2020 and you completely ignore that fact. That would be a total joke. 😁

Gerald Jackson48 said:Man, my college mentor used to think reading books was kind of a joke, too. Whenever we told him we were reading up on a specific topic, he’d tell us to stop wasting our time with books and stick strictly to peer-reviewed journals. His logic was that by the time someone actually compiles and publishes a serious book on a subject, years have passed and half the info is already outdated because of new discoveries.

So, acting like books are "serious" while dismissing other ways of learning feels a bit elitist. Honestly, it might even be the wrong way to look at it.

You really can't draw a fair comparison between someone pursuing a formal degree in a field and a complete layman.

A true specialist—whether they've already finished their studies or are still in the thick of them—uses scientific papers to build upon an existing foundation of knowledge. Plus, they usually have a professor available to untangle the complex parts.

If a layperson tries to tackle a dense scientific paper without that background, they won't understand much, and worse, they might end up connecting all the wrong dots.

That is precisely why, for a beginner, a book is far more useful than a research paper.

Gerald Jackson48 said:Man, my college mentor used to think reading books was kind of a joke, too. Whenever we told him we were reading up on a specific topic, he’d tell us to stop wasting our time with books and stick strictly to peer-reviewed journals. His logic was that by the time someone actually compiles and publishes a serious book on a subject, years have passed and half the info is already outdated because of new discoveries.

So, acting like books are "serious" while dismissing other ways of learning feels a bit elitist. Honestly, it might even be the wrong way to look at it.

At the end of the day, both books and scientific papers are textual mediums—even if you find both online—and they both aim to cover a topic in its entirety.

Online content, however, is a rabbit hole of hyperlinks leading to more hyperlinks... which ultimately pulls your focus and your thoughts miles away from the original subject.

This makes it incredibly difficult for people to maintain deep concentration for any extended period, which in turn makes learning much harder. I actually read somewhere that this is even changing our brain anatomy—that the gray matter is physically thinning out.

Nicholas Gonzalez87 said:Tried the Detroit: Become Human demo—pretty interesting stuff. If you're looking for an alternative to Cyberpunk, Deus Ex is actually a solid choice. 🙂

Yeah, that was one of my absolute favorites growing up, along with Heroes of Might and Magic. 😁

Are you thinking... Heroes of Might and Magic *2*—and especially *3*? 🤣

Man, if I actually tallied up all the hours I poured into titles like Civilization, Master of Orion, Master of Magic (you know the one? A total Civ clone, but honestly the best in its class), and the Heroes of Might and Magic series... I could have finished a Master's degree in Hegel by now. 🤣

Harold Doyle3 said:What exactly is...🙂 You didn't turn up a single thing regarding computer games on 18th or 19th-century papyrus or parchment, nor did you find anything in the Gospel scrolls according to Hegel. So, I suppose reductionism is all that's left on the table now. Fine. Have it your way.

I didn't just hear about them—I actually played them. I even spent some time coding them myself, first in assembly for the Intel 8080 and later in C++. Still, I’m glad my childhood was filled with actual, real-world games instead of just staring at a screen.

Amanda Flores88 said:I’m not sure if we’re totally on the same page—the core elements of gaming are freedom and fun. That ability to just hop in and out whenever you want? That’s exactly what separates a game from a chore or actual life.

The "fun" part is a bit more nuanced, but even when things get pretty brutal, the assumption is that you're having a blast—otherwise, why would you even be playing?

Then there's everything else—psychology, how it's applied, the consequences... but most of the time, we're pretty good at keeping reality and fantasy separate.
And yeah, anything can be misused, I guess.

Yeah, that’s the idea. It should work that way.

But the way we're talking about this—there's a legit fear that those lines aren't as sharp as they used to be. Reality starts looking like a game, and games start feeling like reality.

Obviously, I'm talking about much bigger stuff than just "video games." But maybe that's where the pattern started. Or if not, we can at least use them as a blueprint.

Look at the lockdowns, the "new normal," that weird blend of staying home and working remotely. It’s always a struggle to draw a hard line between where one thing ends and the next begins.

The Matrix. That's how it all starts. Every Matrix has its own seemingly harmless beginning.

Sent from my Galaxy S10 using Reddit

lonegardener said:Are you thinking... Heroes of Might and Magic *2*—and especially *3*? 🤣

Man, if I actually tallied up all the hours I poured into titles like Civilization, Master of Orion, Master of Magic (you know the one? A total Civ clone, but honestly the best in its class), and the Heroes of Might and Magic series... I could have finished a Master's degree in Hegel by now. 🤣

I've heard of Master of Orion, but Master of Magic is news to me. I'll check it out. I did see the latest Civilization in the Xbox store earlier—might just grab it. 🍿

Nicholas Gonzalez87 said:I've heard of Master of Orion, but Master of Magic is news to me. I'll check it out. I did see the latest Civilization in the Xbox store earlier—might just grab it. 🍿

Well, MoM is a lot like Civilization I; we're talking old-school "VGA graphics" here—320x200 at 256 colors. It looks VERY dated by today's standards. Still, it’s incredible how those devs managed to cram such a solid user interface into such tiny pixel counts. That said, if you enjoyed those older titles, you should definitely give Age of Wonders 2 and 3 a look. 😁

ruggedraven36 said:I didn't just hear about them—I actually played them. I even spent some time coding them myself, first in assembly for the Intel 8080 and later in C++. Still, I’m glad my childhood was filled with actual, real-world games instead of just staring at a screen.

👍
Then you definitely understand that whole "spirit of the era": the Z80, those old galaxy shooters, the Commodore, the Atari...
The real question is how on earth you motivate the masses to dump money into this "newfangled" tech!
Some capitalist decided to lean into the whole "bread and circuses" strategy (with a heavy emphasis on the circuses").
Naturally, they bundled it with the promise of constant upgrades—both hardware and software—and then the madness started. You buy a graphics card in the morning, and by dinner, it's already obsolete and sluggish. Someone's constantly picking you off in an online match because your internet connection is garbage, leaving you frantically screaming, "Faster! Faster!"
Then some junk flies into your computer while you're distracted browsing adult sites or playing some sketchy poker game, and suddenly you're hunting for every antivirus, anti-trojan, anti-malware, and anti-scam tool imaginable just to "sanitize," "decontaminate," and "disinfect" your system.

Honestly, I think video games align perfectly with Hegelian philosophy.
You have: 1 - being
0 - non-being
From there, it's all down to the laws of dialectics (and the market), where quantity eventually transforms into quality, and vice versa.

Nicholas Gonzalez87 said:Tried the Detroit: Become Human demo—pretty interesting stuff. If you're looking for an alternative to Cyberpunk, Deus Ex is actually a solid choice. 🙂

Yeah, that was one of my absolute favorites growing up, along with Heroes of Might and Magic. 😁

I haven't played it yet. I wanted to give it a spin before jumping into cyberpunk, but I just ran out of time. Now I might play it instead of cyberpunk if I can find the window, but man, you've got me torn between the two now, lol. 😁

I’d love to weigh in on this topic, but I’ve got some spring landscaping to tackle in the yard first, so I won't have the time right now. I'll get to it tonight, though.

Harold Doyle3 said:👍
Then you definitely understand that whole "spirit of the era": the Z80, those old galaxy shooters, the Commodore, the Atari...
The real question is how on earth you motivate the masses to dump money into this "newfangled" tech!
Some capitalist decided to lean into the whole "bread and circuses" strategy (with a heavy emphasis on the circuses").
Naturally, they bundled it with the promise of constant upgrades—both hardware and software—and then the madness started. You buy a graphics card in the morning, and by dinner, it's already obsolete and sluggish. Someone's constantly picking you off in an online match because your internet connection is garbage, leaving you frantically screaming, "Faster! Faster!"
Then some junk flies into your computer while you're distracted browsing adult sites or playing some sketchy poker game, and suddenly you're hunting for every antivirus, anti-trojan, anti-malware, and anti-scam tool imaginable just to "sanitize," "decontaminate," and "disinfect" your system.

Honestly, I think video games align perfectly with Hegelian philosophy.
You have: 1 - being
0 - non-being
From there, it's all down to the laws of dialectics (and the market), where quantity eventually transforms into quality, and vice versa.

Of course I am. That's exactly why I know video games don't have any actual value.

ruggedraven36 said:It’s just a game run through software built into a computer.

What are we actually doing while playing?

We feed input data to the program via physical movement—think controller buttons or mouse clicks—and our senses pick up the output, which lets us manage all those interactive elements that depend on us.

Is there any actual value in playing games?

Video games are worthless. Honestly, they’re pretty bad for kids—they pull them away from real-world play and everything else matters too.

Where does philosophy fit into video games?

Nowhere.

What even is play, really? I find myself staring at the ceiling sometimes, wondering if we ever actually grasp the essence of what it means to just... play. Is it a distraction from the grind, or is it the only thing that actually makes us feel alive while we’re navigating this chaotic life? I don't have a neat, academic answer for you, but I can't help but feel like there's something much deeper happening when we let go of our responsibilities and just dive into something for the sake of it.
What exactly are we doing when we dive into a game?
What’s the actual point of playing games? I find myself wondering about this quite often, staring at my console and questioning if I'm just killing time or actually doing something meaningful with my life. Is there some deep, inherent value in immersing ourselves in these digital worlds, or am I just chasing a temporary dopamine hit to distract myself from the grind of reality? I honestly want to know what you all think—is it just mindless escapism, or is there something more profound happening when we lose ourselves in a story or a challenge?

I honestly can't help but feel like I’m constantly staring at some massive, unsolvable puzzle where half the pieces are missing and the other half don't even seem to belong to the same box, though I suppose that’s just life, isn't it? It feels like we spend all this energy trying to connect these complex dots—trying to make sense of everything from how our society functions to why we feel so disconnected from one another—only to realize that the picture we were aiming for might have been a total illusion all along. I know I tend to overthink things and probably ramble on more than I should, but there’s just this persistent, nagging sensation that if we could only find that one missing fragment of understanding, everything would finally click into place, even if my clumsy attempts at solving it usually just end up making a bigger mess of things. kaže:
Technology is moving at such a breakneck pace these days, and honestly, it feels like gaming is migrating entirely into this realm of true virtual reality through these specialized headsets. It brings up this one deeply philosophical concept called "presence," which is basically just a fancy way of describing that specific level of immersion where a player becomes so completely swallowed up by the artificial world that you start losing track of where the game ends and your actual life begins.

This provides such an incredible foundation for some deeper philosophical digging, so I’ll definitely jump back into the conversation once I can carve out a little more breathing room in my schedule.

I’ve been sitting here thinking about how much we tend to overcomplicate things when the simplest answer is usually staring us right in the face, almost like we’re trying to outsmart our own intuition just for the sake of it. It’s funny, really—how we can spend hours debating the most complex theories or getting lost in all this dense, academic jargon, only to realize that the core truth was actually quite plain and straightforward all along. I sometimes catch myself doing this too, getting caught up in my own head and making mountains out of molehills, but I suppose that’s just part of being human, isn't it? We want everything to be profound and layered, yet there's a certain honest beauty in just keeping it simple and being direct about what we mean. kaže:
Honestly, this whole topic really does carry some weight, so if you're looking for a starting point, it might be wise to dig into an early paper by Marija Selak from back when she was still a young PhD student; she did some fascinating work on this exact subject by weaving together the philosophies of Nikolai Berdyaev and Martin Heidegger.

Maybe this might actually encourage some of you dear friends to dig a little deeper than just our usual surface-level distractions and tackle that one massive, heavy-hitting relationship that essentially dictates our entire reality—though, if I’m being honest, it’s already been pulling all the strings behind the scenes for quite some time—which is, fundamentally, that profound philosophical connection between man and... I’ve been sitting here thinking about the whole concept of *episteme*—you know, that deep, foundational kind of knowledge that goes way beyond just knowing a few random facts or being able to pass a test. It’s that structural understanding of how things actually work, the kind that shapes how we see the world before we even realize we're looking at it. I sometimes feel like I'm constantly stumbling through the dark trying to grasp it, feeling a bit foolish because while most people seem to be navigating life with such certainty, I'm still over here questioning the very ground I'm standing on. It's a heavy thing to wrap your head around, honestly, but there's something so incredibly vital about trying to reach that level of clarity, even if it feels like an uphill battle most days. i I’ve been spending way too much time lately thinking about the concept of *techne*, that old-school idea of craftsmanship and practical wisdom, and honestly, I can't stop circling back to it. It feels like we’re living in this era where everything is so automated and frictionless that we’ve completely lost touch with the actual soul of making things—that deep, intuitive connection between the creator and the work itself. You know, that specific kind of knowledge that isn't just following a manual or a set of algorithms, but is something you feel in your hands and your gut. I was reading some stuff recently that reminded me how easily we mistake mere technical efficiency for true mastery, and it’s a little humbling to realize how much of our modern "skill" is really just knowing which buttons to press on a piece of software. There’s such a profound difference between being a proficient user of a tool and actually possessing the *techne* to command it, and I think we’re all feeling a bit adrift because of that gap. It’s a bit embarrassing to admit, but I definitely find myself staring at my own projects sometimes, wondering if I’m actually building anything meaningful or if I'm just going through the motions of a highly optimized process.

I was reading through this academic paper on linguistic structures, and honestly, it’s one of those deep dives that really makes you question how much we take our own way of speaking for granted. It explores the intricacies of how language shapes our perception of reality—that classic idea that the tools we use to communicate actually build the world we live in. It’s pretty heavy stuff, looking at how specific grammatical frameworks influence the way an individual processes thought, but there’s something deeply moving about the idea that we aren't just using language; we are being shaped by it every single day. I found myself sitting there for a good hour just staring at the screen, feeling slightly overwhelmed by the sheer complexity of it all, yet strangely comforted by the notion that our very consciousness is tied to these invisible linguistic threads. It definitely gives you a whole new perspective on why certain concepts feel so easy to express in one language but almost impossible to grasp in another.

I'll give it a read.
Thanks a million!

steelridge58 said:What even is play, really? I find myself staring at the ceiling sometimes, wondering if we ever actually grasp the essence of what it means to just... play. Is it a distraction from the grind, or is it the only thing that actually makes us feel alive while we’re navigating this chaotic life? I don't have a neat, academic answer for you, but I can't help but feel like there's something much deeper happening when we let go of our responsibilities and just dive into something for the sake of it.
What exactly are we doing when we dive into a game?
What’s the actual point of playing games? I find myself wondering about this quite often, staring at my console and questioning if I'm just killing time or actually doing something meaningful with my life. Is there some deep, inherent value in immersing ourselves in these digital worlds, or am I just chasing a temporary dopamine hit to distract myself from the grind of reality? I honestly want to know what you all think—is it just mindless escapism, or is there something more profound happening when we lose ourselves in a story or a challenge?

I honestly can't help but feel like I’m constantly staring at some massive, unsolvable puzzle where half the pieces are missing and the other half don't even seem to belong to the same box, though I suppose that’s just life, isn't it? It feels like we spend all this energy trying to connect these complex dots—trying to make sense of everything from how our society functions to why we feel so disconnected from one another—only to realize that the picture we were aiming for might have been a total illusion all along. I know I tend to overthink things and probably ramble on more than I should, but there’s just this persistent, nagging sensation that if we could only find that one missing fragment of understanding, everything would finally click into place, even if my clumsy attempts at solving it usually just end up making a bigger mess of things. kaže:
Technology is moving at such a breakneck pace these days, and honestly, it feels like gaming is migrating entirely into this realm of true virtual reality through these specialized headsets. It brings up this one deeply philosophical concept called "presence," which is basically just a fancy way of describing that specific level of immersion where a player becomes so completely swallowed up by the artificial world that you start losing track of where the game ends and your actual life begins.

This provides such an incredible foundation for some deeper philosophical digging, so I’ll definitely jump back into the conversation once I can carve out a little more breathing room in my schedule.

I’ve been sitting here thinking about how much we tend to overcomplicate things when the simplest answer is usually staring us right in the face, almost like we’re trying to outsmart our own intuition just for the sake of it. It’s funny, really—how we can spend hours debating the most complex theories or getting lost in all this dense, academic jargon, only to realize that the core truth was actually quite plain and straightforward all along. I sometimes catch myself doing this too, getting caught up in my own head and making mountains out of molehills, but I suppose that’s just part of being human, isn't it? We want everything to be profound and layered, yet there's a certain honest beauty in just keeping it simple and being direct about what we mean. kaže:
Honestly, this whole topic really does carry some weight, so if you're looking for a starting point, it might be wise to dig into an early paper by Marija Selak from back when she was still a young PhD student; she did some fascinating work on this exact subject by weaving together the philosophies of Nikolai Berdyaev and Martin Heidegger.

Maybe this might actually encourage some of you dear friends to dig a little deeper than just our usual surface-level distractions and tackle that one massive, heavy-hitting relationship that essentially dictates our entire reality—though, if I’m being honest, it’s already been pulling all the strings behind the scenes for quite some time—which is, fundamentally, that profound philosophical connection between man and... I’ve been sitting here thinking about the whole concept of *episteme*—you know, that deep, foundational kind of knowledge that goes way beyond just knowing a few random facts or being able to pass a test. It’s that structural understanding of how things actually work, the kind that shapes how we see the world before we even realize we're looking at it. I sometimes feel like I'm constantly stumbling through the dark trying to grasp it, feeling a bit foolish because while most people seem to be navigating life with such certainty, I'm still over here questioning the very ground I'm standing on. It's a heavy thing to wrap your head around, honestly, but there's something so incredibly vital about trying to reach that level of clarity, even if it feels like an uphill battle most days. i I’ve been spending way too much time lately thinking about the concept of *techne*, that old-school idea of craftsmanship and practical wisdom, and honestly, I can't stop circling back to it. It feels like we’re living in this era where everything is so automated and frictionless that we’ve completely lost touch with the actual soul of making things—that deep, intuitive connection between the creator and the work itself. You know, that specific kind of knowledge that isn't just following a manual or a set of algorithms, but is something you feel in your hands and your gut. I was reading some stuff recently that reminded me how easily we mistake mere technical efficiency for true mastery, and it’s a little humbling to realize how much of our modern "skill" is really just knowing which buttons to press on a piece of software. There’s such a profound difference between being a proficient user of a tool and actually possessing the *techne* to command it, and I think we’re all feeling a bit adrift because of that gap. It’s a bit embarrassing to admit, but I definitely find myself staring at my own projects sometimes, wondering if I’m actually building anything meaningful or if I'm just going through the motions of a highly optimized process.

I was reading through this academic paper on linguistic structures, and honestly, it’s one of those deep dives that really makes you question how much we take our own way of speaking for granted. It explores the intricacies of how language shapes our perception of reality—that classic idea that the tools we use to communicate actually build the world we live in. It’s pretty heavy stuff, looking at how specific grammatical frameworks influence the way an individual processes thought, but there’s something deeply moving about the idea that we aren't just using language; we are being shaped by it every single day. I found myself sitting there for a good hour just staring at the screen, feeling slightly overwhelmed by the sheer complexity of it all, yet strangely comforted by the notion that our very consciousness is tied to these invisible linguistic threads. It definitely gives you a whole new perspective on why certain concepts feel so easy to express in one language but almost impossible to grasp in another.

I'll give it a read.
Thanks a million!

I can't think of a single trait that applies to every single thing labeled a "game"—so honestly, I've got no answer for you.

ruggedraven36 said:To actually talk about your dreams, you first have to wake up. Same goes for this whole obsession with the virtual world—you can play around in there while you still have one foot in reality. But honestly? It’s entirely possible that one day you just won't wake up from the simulation, and you'll simply fade away into nothingness.

... vanish quietly from the physical world? 🙂

Isn't every single experience, every moment of being, fundamentally an internal matter?

Life appears to be split between the external and the internal, but isn't this "external" realm—this thing we call Nature, the material world—mostly just... well, endurance?

And it becomes all the more much of an endurance test when it can't be easily translated into some kind of internal harmony.