Hello Straggler,
Strag writes:
Do you really claim no more "knowledge" regarding one than the other? Really?
I made no claims of knowledge whatsoever. When doing research science often attaches confidence values to the variables. It is of course a matter of how much confidence one places on the supposed knowledge eh? In other words I have more confidence your pen will drop at the speed of 9.8m/s square. But little confidence you have a soul.
I do not KNOW you do not have a soul no more than I know your pen wont quantum tunnel though your desk.
Strag writes:
On what basis do you have "confidence" that the physical laws "matter seems to obey" will continue into the future..
On the basis that historically the physical laws agree with that which has been observed. However the past may not actually exist. Time may be ever accumulating fractions of the now, and we only associate a past because temporally we make those assumptions.
Strag writes:
.. or that your memory of these laws is even based on reality rather than false memories of the type described by the 1 second universe proposition described in the OP?
I am a creature that derives my existence from my sensory perception. If I exist in a universe that is manifested by a computer simulation then how is that different than my existence in this natural universe? If two things are identical in every aspect then there is no difference.