In this blog post, we’ll take a step-by-step look at which to choose—the virtual world or the real world—based on a few assumptions.
Ever since humanity emerged as a thinking species and society has made tremendous progress, discussions about the virtual world have been constant. The 1999 film *The Matrix* is a prime example of this contemporary interest. Beyond the iconic scene of dodging bullets by arching his back and the spectacular action sequences of leaping from rooftop to rooftop while battling villains, the film presents a profound question: Should we live in the virtual world or the real world? Anyone who has seen the movie has likely pondered this dilemma when Neo is faced with the choice between the red pill and the blue pill. So, if someone like Morpheus appeared while you were living your current life and offered you the same choice, which would you pick? I take the position that, like the protagonist Neo, you don’t necessarily have to choose reality.
Before we begin the discussion, let’s establish a few assumptions. First, the quality of life before and after the choice is the same. Whether it’s the virtual world or the real world, we assume that the world you’ll live in after making the choice is identical to the one you were living in before. Second, at the moment of choice, I know which world I am living in. I assume that I know whether the environment I have lived in so far is virtual or real. Third, at the moment of choice, I possess the same level of knowledge about both the virtual world and the real world. I assume that I have the same level of knowledge about the world I have not yet experienced as I do about the world I have lived in so far. Fourth, after making the choice, the memory of the moment of choice disappears, and life continues exactly as it was before the choice. For example, suppose a person living in the virtual world chooses reality; at that moment, they forget the facts they simultaneously learned about both worlds and retain all the memories accumulated in the virtual world. Under these conditions, neither the memory of the moment of choice nor any difference in knowledge influences the choice, and since the quality of life is the same before and after the choice, motivations such as choosing the virtual world in the hope of a better life are ruled out.
Some argue that because the “real” possesses intrinsic qualities and society places great value on them, one must choose reality, the original. To simplify the discussion, let’s refer to the real as the “original” and the fake as the “copy” from now on. Those who make this argument say that just as a counterfeit luxury bag is not accepted, a copy that imitates the original cannot possess the same value as the original. However, before simply comparing the value of the original and the copy, let’s consider two scenarios. Suppose a bag from Brand L is manufactured in another factory using the exact same methods and procedures as the original factory. Looking solely at the end products from these two independent factories, they could be almost identical. Looking only at these two bags, would you be able to distinguish which is the original and which is the copy? In another scenario, suppose an artist painted a picture after tremendous effort, and someone else copied it exactly. Would a person presented with these two paintings be able to tell which is the original and which is the copy?
The commonality between these two situations is that, at first glance, the distinction between the original and the copy may seem clear, but when looking solely at the end results, it can be difficult to make a clear distinction. To be more precise, there is an ontological distinction: the item created first and used as the subject of copying is the original, and the result of that copying is the copy. However, if the two results are exactly the same, they may both be perceived as originals by those viewing them. Of course, the process involved—such as the creator’s mental anguish and effort during the initial creation—must be respected, and the value derived from it must be acknowledged. It is this difference in the process that creates an ontological distinction between the original and the copy, serving as the basis for people to value the original more highly. However, most of us live in the world from an epistemological perspective, seeing, feeling, and judging things “as they are.” Since we cannot know the process through which something was created by looking only at the end result, people judge value based on the finished object or the world itself.
Whether in the real world or the virtual world, the creation process may differ, but the world itself is perceived identically by those who inhabit it. In other words, because a person facing a choice makes judgments within an epistemological framework, they may not perceive an essential difference between reality and the virtual world. Therefore, such decisions should be left to the individual at the moment of choice.
Another counterargument is that one should not choose the virtual world because individuals cannot act according to their free will within it. If an individual’s life in the virtual world is entirely predetermined by a program, there is room to argue that free will does not exist. However, we also need to question whether we truly act solely by free will in the real world—that is, whether free will itself even exists.
As a species of animal, humans possess basic desires such as the need for sleep, food, and sex. However, humans do not act solely on these desires. We use reason to control them. While the act of controlling desires through reason can be viewed as free will, it is difficult to regard it strictly as “free” will, as the motivation for that control often comes from external sources. For example, if you feel sleepy but stay awake to work on an assignment, staying awake may be an act of “will,” but the reason you exercised that will is due to external pressure to complete the assignment. Therefore, it is difficult to call this pure “free” will. The same applies to cases where one resists the urge to eat despite feeling hungry. If the reason for resisting the urge to eat is a social atmosphere that favors a slim physique, that choice is triggered by social norms and cannot be considered complete free will.
Even the things we believe in reality—that we think, act, and feel freely—are in fact shaped to a large extent by the influence of society and culture. The saying that humans are social and cultural beings means that our ways of thinking and behaving are formed within the society and culture in which we live. For example, there was a time when people were reluctant to enter the entertainment industry because entertainers were strongly viewed as “hustlers,” but as society changed, entertainers became figures of admiration for teenagers. In this way, the social climate has a significant influence on individual thought. Even things we strongly reject—issues like incest or homosexuality—may be emotions formed through education and indoctrination. Freud explained that such taboos were formed long ago in society and have taken root deep within the individual. To that extent, our minds and thoughts are not entirely free from the deep layers we are unaware of. Even when deciding on a career path, the accumulated advice from those around us—such as “this seems like a good choice”—often leads us to strive to follow the direction others approve of, rather than finding what we truly desire. When I see situations where people cannot do what they want or meet the people they wish to meet due to the barriers of reality, it makes me wonder how much room there really is in the real world to act according to one’s pure, individual free will.
In summary, I do not view the virtual world as inferior to the real world. Since I, too, am a being living as a subject of perception, I believe that on the level of perception, the virtual world and the real world can feel identical. Regarding the issue of free will, it is not unique to the virtual world; the real world is similarly constrained by social and cultural factors. Therefore, rather than viewing the virtual world as merely a fictional space or a wrong space to be avoided, we can consider it another distinct space where people live. From that perspective, there would be no particular reason to prioritize reality.
Perhaps we cannot rule out the possibility that we, too, are living under the control of a system like The Matrix without even realizing it. The idea that we might be beings who, like the characters in the movie, do not know which world we are living in is not entirely far-fetched.
