Excerpt from Simulationist Biology — Introduction
It seems strange to think of conservation in the context of simulationist teachings. Why should we care about the “earth” or its environment, when after all, it is only a simulation of a real planet with a real environment to care about? Didn’t the Simulator(s) program the health of the environment into the source code that is the base of the simulation itself? They surely must have known that if intelligent beings were to arise in the simulation (or were programmed to arise, depending on whose interpretations of the code signs you accept), these beings might not understand the impact of their various activities on the health of the environment they habitate. The Simulator(s) would most certainly not want their creation to destroy itself by way of environmental genocide and more than they would want to see our end by war or alien invasion or some other imagined global catastrophe. Although much has been written on the problem of war in the simulation less thought has been given to other self destructive activities and how/why the simulator(s) would allow them or perhaps cause them (another code dependent position). Discussions of ultimate purpose or causes are way off topic and much too deep for this introductory simulationist biology text, however the reasons why we, as simulated persons should care, are well within its purview, or so the editors believe. Thus we come back to the question with which we began this chapter on conservation in the simulation, and rephrase it only slightly, why bother?
On the macro level the question of why bother has an easy answer that I think most persons would agree with, and that is to ask another question, what is the alternative? The data, while perhaps not incontrovertible, are certainly highly suggestive that in the absence of concerted human effort in the areas of pollution control and conservation the environment would suffer grave consequences that could well doom the human race. However, on the micro level the question of why bother becomes a much thornier one. It could easily be argued, and no doubt many simulationists (and realityists) take this position, that the actions of any one person are inconsequential in the grand scheme, and therefore they need not contribute at all to conservation efforts like recycling or worry about the environment in the least. Unlike the reality is real crowd the simulationist has another quiver in his argumentative arrow in the sense that he could say that the simulator(s) have set things up in the source code to act as ‘firewalls’ against environmental catastrophe. Therefore, even if a subset of persons decide to have no care for the environment, there will always be a plurality, or just enough people who do care, to keep things running smoothly, and keep the environment relatively free from harm. There really is no counter to this line of thinking other than to ask yet another question which is, what if everybody thought this way?……….
pg. 2, paragraphs 2&3