I have already written this once and then deleted it because I'm not sure if I am willing to chase the ethical implications of a simulated reality hypothesis.
Specifically, I came across a 2019 SXSW talk from George Hotz (you can wikipedia his background) titled "Jailbreaking the Simulation" and was pretty disgusted by his sloughing off of psychedelics as a tool. If I am paraphrasing accurately, I understood him say that psychedelics are only in your mind and cannot help you "jailbreak" the external reality of nature, which seems to be his goal. He goes on to say, we are living in a video game and because we have cheat codes to games we create, why could we not find "cheat codes" or examples were our reality breaks down in nature. "Is there anything more important than trying to find those anomalies to hack our reality and send information back to the code writer or God of our reality?"..is his ultimate message with final thoughts on starting a church religion focusing on conversation to find the "jailbreak."
There was also a theoretical physicist S. James Gates Jr. who did some work on converting equations to structures or supersymmetric algebras which he calls "Adinkra" symbols. Simply, our world has the infrastructure at the smallest scale of being "code" or equations of physics that are perceived as nature around us from fibonnaci sequences to mandelbrot fractal geometry which is the macro scale of those equations.
I cite both of these guys because there is some propaganda going on in my opinion on "living in a matrix" and "we are just a simulation" type ideas without much substance on what TM would bring us to from his professor by asking the question "And what is so great about it?" I have not found many people answering this question. I don't disagree with either George or James or anyone else that we might propose we are in a simulation or that we are the simulation itself. I'm good with that, even if there is no free will and we are controlling ourselves as a memory in multiple worlds. However, I do disagree when George says we had no choice to be born into this circumstance - this is where psychedelics help.
When I reflect on my notes from my 10g session it was obvious that the review at baseline seems absurd because of how grand it is perceived. However during the session at its peak the baseline consciousness also seems absurd upon reflection because it is so small and minor in comparison. What I am trying to say, is that when you are not taking a psychedelic you just don't have the mental connections you have when you take psilocybin, you are closed off and see things through a more logical lens which keeps you inside the framework of your narrative. However, when you take psilocybin connections are increased exponentially (Carhart-Harris) and you are exposed to ideas in the imagination that otherwise were not accessible.
So what does this mean? My experience on 10g was real because it was my experience. My senses were widened and with eyes open I could see what I would perceive as living in a matrix which was scrolling marquee of symbols across my face and infinite complexity in my surroundings. I also realized the capital "I" is everything which we all are and the little "i" is the experience we each are having in our own realities. The little i is a fractal part of the capital I. Okay there are many other ways to describe this but I like this for simplicity and keeping religion terminology neutral. The other key idea is that we choose how we come back to this world. Said another way, the I seeds the i's intentionally for the experience individually in this world.
So what is so great about it? If the capital I chose this experience for you, little i, then there must be a reason. I like the book "what dreams may come" where I think there is a plausible idea here that supports the hermetic saying "as above so below." Specifically, your actions here have consequences beyond here simultaneously. I like to think of it as soul upgrading both individually and as a species. If you can do more good than harm in this world then the next return of i (maybe your child) will have it better than the previous. Conversely, a consensus "bad" act will also have consequences like a reverberation seeking equilibrium. I think this is the case for building blocks on ethics which must be apart of any simulated reality conversation. Now, if we don't have free will then I would say that we have already won and when we reunite with I is when we get to behold the scale of this work in all its beauty and love.
So here it is. All the psychonauts at the end of their lives just wanted to be their best self so they could help those closest to them ease their suffering. There is nothing to worry about or solve (unless you are still seeking your own answer) but that does not mean there is no action to take. If our consciousness is going through a birthing and it is inevitable that our software outperforms the hardware then we must foster empathy for all things in all times and all spaces. If you do not learn that then you missed the mark.
I'm sure there is more to say here but that's all for tonight.