AccScience Publishing / BIJP / Volume 12 / Issue 4 / DOI: 10.29288/beytulhikme.65747
Submit to BIJP
Cite this article
1
Views
Related Info Links
Google Scholar
More by Authors Links
Ergün Avcı
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
Forthcoming Issue
Current Issue
View All
News and Announcements
View All
RESEARCH ARTICLE

From Ancient Cave to Virtual Cave: Metaverse

Ergün Avcı1
Show Less
1 Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Felsefe Programı 20160, Denizli, Turkey
BIJP 2022, 12(4), 981–1005; https://doi.org/10.29288/beytulhikme.65747
Received: 25 August 2022 | Published online: 24 December 2022
© 2022 by the Authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Download PDF
XML
Cite
Abstract

As much as reality itself, its reflections and appearances have taken a significant place in philosophical discussions. While Plato's Allegory of the Cave is one of the first of these discussions, the philosophy of the virtual shows the final state of these discussions today. The virtual cave is the modern-day version of Plato's cave. Appearances in Plato's cave have their own mode of existence, and likewise, virtual objects in the virtual cave have their own mode of existence. There are many philosophical similarities between the ancient cave and the virtual cave. So much so that, according to the first, the shadows in the cave are a different view of reality, while according to the second, the virtual images in the virtual cave are another view of reality. The philosophy of the ancient cave and virtual cave essentially point to the debates about what the nature of reality is. The ontological and epistemic dimensions of appearance and virtual image lead us to the discussion about the nature and whatness of reality. The most common and advanced virtual cave today is the metaverse. Metaverse consists of virtual communities that combine the reality of the physical world with the reality of the virtual world and are open to all kinds of manipulations.

Keywords
Allegory of the cave
ancient cave
virtual cave
reality
appearance
metaverse.
References
  1. Anderson, D. L. (2009). A Semantics for Virtual Environments and the Ontological Status of Virtual Objects. APA Newsletter on Philosophy and Computers, 9(1), 15-19.
  2. Beisbart, C. (2019). Virtual Realism: Really Realism or only Virtually so? A Comment on D. J. Chalmers’s Petrus Hispanus Lectures. Disputatio, 11(55), 297-331.
  3. Bender, M. ve Kuhr, T. (2018). Belle II Virtual Reality & CAVE Implementation. CHEP, LMU München, 1-9.
  4. Berezin, A. A. (1994). The Problem of Ultimate-Reality-and-Meaning in the Context of Informational Self-Organization and Isotopic Diversity. Ultimate Reality and Meaning, 17(4), 295-309.
  5. Brey, P. (2003). The Social Ontology of Virtual Environments. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 62(1), 269-282.
  6. Brey, P. (2008). Virtual Reality and Computer Simulation. T. Himma, K. H. (Ed.), in Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics (ss. 315-332). London: John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1057/9781137349088_21
  7. Brey, P. (2014). The Physical and Social Reality of Virtual Worlds. M. Grimshaw (Ed.), in The Oxford Handbook of Virtuality. New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199826162.013.029
  8. Chalmers, D. J. (2017). The Virtual and the Real. Disputatio, 9(46), 309-352. doi:10.1515/disp-2017-0009
  9. Chalmers, D. J. (2022). Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
  10. Cruz-Neira, C., vd., (1992). The CAVE: Audio Visual Experience Automatic Virtual Environment. Communications of the ACM, 35(6), 64-72. doi:10.1145/129888.129892
  11. Dedeoğlu, M. M. (2017). Bir Zihniyet Tutumu ve Düşünme Formu Olarak Dogmatizm ve Dogmatik Tutum. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 7(13), 798-823.
  12. DeFanti, T., vd., (2010). The future of the CAVE. Open Engineering, 1(1), 16-37.
  13. Flynn, C. (2014, Kasım). An Open Source Framework For CAVE Automatic Virtual Environments. Master's Thesis. Dublin City University.
  14. Furness, T. A. ve Barfield, W. (1995). Introduction to Virtual Environments and Advanced Interface Design. W. Barfield ve T. A. Furness (Ed.), in Virtual Environments and Advanced Interface Design. New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780195075557.001.0001
  15. Heim, M. (1994). The Metaphysics of Virtual Reality. New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195092585.001.0001
  16. Heim, M. (1998). Virtual Realism. NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780195104264.001.0001
  17. Kant, I. (1993). Arı Usun Eleştirisi. (A. Yardımlı, Çev.). İstanbul: İdea Yayınevi.
  18. Kuhn, T. S. (1995). Bilimsel Devrimlerin Yapısı. (N. Kuyaş, Çev.) (4. bs.). İstanbul: Alan Yayıncılık.
  19. LaValle, S. (2016). Virtual reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  20. Machan, T. R. (2011). Reality, Reason, and Rights: Essays in Honor of Tibor R. Machan. Lanham MD.: Lexington Books.
  21. Mystakidis, S. (2022). Metaverse. Encyclopedia, 2(1), 486-497. doi:10.3390/encyclopedia2010031
  22. Nozick, R. (2006). Anarşi, Devlet ve Ütopya. (A. Oktay, Çev.) (2. bs.). İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi.
  23. Platon(Eflatun). (2005). Devlet. (V. Atayman ve C. Saraçoğlu, Çev.). İstanbul: Bordo Siyah.
  24. Qvortrup, L. (2002). Cyberspace as Representation of Space Experience: In Defence of a Phenomenological Approach. L. Qvortrup, J. F. Jensen, E. Kjems, N. Lehmann ve C. Madsen (Ed.), in Virtual Space: Spatiality in Virtual Inhabited 3D Worlds (ss. 5-24). London: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-0225-0_1
  25. Rescher, N. (2011). Reality and Its Appearance. New York: Continuum.
  26. Rhodes, G. A. (2015). Augmented Reality and the Posthuman: An (AR) Allegory of the (VR) Cave. NYU, New York, 1-10.
  27. Ropolyi, L. (2016). Virtuality and Reality–Toward a Representation Ontology. Philosophies, 1(1), 40-54. doi:10.3390/philosophies1010040
  28. Schnieder, R. (1995). Virtual Environments and the Future of Human-Computer Interfaces: The Electronic Frontier in Social Context. Journal of Intelligent Systems, 5(2-4), 111-124. doi:10.1515/JISYS.1995.5.2-4.111
  29. Schommer, M. (1990). The Effects of Beliefs About the Nature of Knowledge on  Comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498-504. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.3.498
  30. Søraker, J. H. (2009). Virtual Entities, Environments, Worlds and Reality: Suggested Definitions and Taxonomy. C. Ess ve M. Thorseth (Ed.), (ss. 1-27). The Philosophy of Computer Games Conference, sunulmuş bildiri, Oslo.
  31. Stanovsky, D. P. D. (2004). Virtual Reality. L. Floridi (Ed.), in The Blackwell Guide To The Philosophy Of Computing And Information, Blackwell philosophy guides (ss. 167-177). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
  32. Vasconcelos, G. N. de, vd., (2019). Do we still need CAVEs? Blucher Design Proceedings içinde (C. 7, ss. 133-141). 37 Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe and XXIII Iberoamerican Society of Digital Graphics, Joint Conference (N. 1), sunulmuş bildiri, São Paulo: Blucher. doi:10.5151/proceedings-ecaadesigradi2019_474
  33. Whitworth, B. (2007). The physical world as a virtual reality: A prima facie case. Research Letters in the Information and Mathematical Sciences, 11, 44-60.
  34. Zhai, P. (1998). Get Real: A Philosophical Adventure in Virtual Reality. Maryland, ABD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Share
Back to top
Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy, Print ISSN: 1303-8303, Published by AccScience Publishing
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept