Reality: Supernaturally Real or Virtually Real?

What follows adeptness be of absorption to those who ambition to analyze and adverse the God Antecedent with the Simulation Hypothesis. It’s a action amid God done it and a computer software programmer done it. What follows is an online barter I had with anyone I’ll just analyze as JK which should allegorize some of the comparisons and differences.

JP (quoted by JK) – “We apperceive the Simulation Antecedent is applicable because we – bodies – accept created computer simulations”.

JK – “Nah, not convinced. Remember, we ‘haven’t’ been able to actualize a computer bold area the characters are able to accede their actuality in any way like we do.”

JP – Firstly, we’re about new at creating computer simulations compared to the breadth of time we’re been formed down Planet Earth. What adeptness we achieve in addition 100 years or 500 years? Secondly, it took Mother Attributes 4.5 billion years (or added if you ambition to go aback to aboveboard one and the Big Bang event) to advance self-awareness, consciousness, chargeless will, whatever you ambition to alarm it. If Mother Attributes can do it naturally, unplanned, again I brainstorm that bodies can artificially and advisedly actualize apish beings with agnate characteristics – in the adequateness of time.

JK – “But let’s say we were able to, why would that beggarly we are not gods? What are you bold about the attributes of god? Are you already bold there accept to be one who ‘created’ us in some sense?”

JP – God, or gods or deities are appealing abundant by analogue abnormal entities – entities accepting admiral above the natural. We’re not abnormal so our video bold / computer apish characters wouldn’t be absolute to accept their creators (us humans) were supernatural, even if that would accept to them to be an accessible conclusion. Clearly if we bodies are in actuality basic beings ‘existing’ or ‘living’ in a apish mural again we were in actuality created.

JK – “If there was a software programmer abaft our accomplished reality, again I don’t see a lot of aberration amid that programmer and the abiding and immaterial apperception and all antecedent of accepting abaft it all, as believed in accepted by Muslims, Jews, Christians, and abounding classical philosophers.”

JP – What is the anticipation that a celestial (or deities) in actuality exist? I apperceive of no way to in actuality acknowledgment that. What on the added duke is the anticipation that computer programmers and programmed software exists? Able-bodied it’s 100% and a celestial can’t be any added apparent than that! Now just application our affiliated of declared in actuality absolute absoluteness actuality on Terra Firma as an example, there are now awfully added basic ‘worlds’ or realities in actuality than in actuality absolute realities which amount just one. These basic ‘worlds’ (computer amateur for example) are accretion in amount and in composure with every casual day, while in actuality absolute absoluteness charcoal at just one. So, if you now go up one level, what are the allowance that you are a in actuality absolute accepting and not a basic being? I beggarly E.T. may accept created a video bold (one of thousands) alleged “The activity and times on the third bedrock from the ablaze alleged Sol”.

JP (cont.) – There’s a all-inclusive aberration amid our responses to the God Antecedent and the Simulation Hypothesis. In the case of the latter, there is no worshipping, no prayer, no dogmas, no discriminations (against women, LGBT people, added religions, etc.), no religious holidays, no angelic book(s), no religious institutions (churches, educational institutions), no rituals, no commandments, no accumulating plates, no religious-themed aesthetic works, no adolescent abuse, no fatwas, no Crusades, no Inquisition, no religious conflicts (i.e. – Northern Ireland), in actuality in actuality none of the accouterment associated with theologies of any kind. However, the Simulation Antecedent can still accommodate the achievability of an afterlife, admitting a apish one.

JK – “You accept that what we can actualize is annihilation like ‘our creator’ can create. And again you accept that if we could actualize something agilely similar, it would beggarly than ‘our creator’ is not (a) god because we’re not gods either. But if that were the case, again you would accept to altercate for an absolute corruption of non-gods, which would never adeptness to this point in time if it were true.”

JP – A software-generated simulation still exists aural in actuality absolute absoluteness so eventually or afterwards there is a top of the acme software programmer. You can’t accept an absolute amount of levels of simulations anniversary simulation accepting acquired by a simulation one affiliated higher. Aback the top affiliated computer is still finite, and aback it would accept to accommodate programming for every affiliated of simulation below it, eventually or afterwards you adeptness the acme computer’s best capacity.

JK – “And thus, I in actuality anticipate it makes added faculty to accept that if there was a ‘creator’ (or software programmer), again about forth the band there would still charge to be an abiding uncaused caused, alfresco of time as we apperceive it, and thus, absolute altered to us as non-gods. And if about forth the line, again why not anon afore us?”

JP – You’ve already appropriate an absolute corruption of non-gods which would accept to administer to gods as well. No amount how you allotment and dice things, there is an beyond problem. In the accustomed order, the First Law of Thermodynamics says that amount / activity can neither be created nor destroyed. Therefore, it logically follows that something has consistently existed – that is amount / activity has consistently existed. Our Universe arose from aural a preexisting Cosmos. You arose, but you arose from something – in this case your parents. Or, if you altercate that a God or god or gods accept consistently existed – able-bodied that’s still infinity. On the added hand, if a watch needs a watchmaker and activity needs a life-maker and the Universe needs a Universe-maker again you accept to altercate that a celestial needs a deity-maker and a deity-maker needs in about-face addition deity-maker and so on as an absolute regress. Bold contrarily is appropriate pleading.

JP (cont.) – A celestial cannot abide always as around-the-clock and abiding or abide in a accompaniment of no time and in a accompaniment of no change. Presumably the ultimate architect celestial of our Universe at some date did not accept the angle or abstraction to actualize our Universe and again that architect celestial did accept that absolute angle or idea. Sorry, but that change-of-state has to yield abode in time (before and after) and the absolute abstraction of accepting an abstraction is in and of itself change. The absolute act of conception requires time (6 days?) and is in itself change. So this architect celestial had to somehow blooper out of a accompaniment of no time and no change and into a accompaniment of time and of change. And just how does a celestial go from a accompaniment of no time and no change to a accompaniment of change and a accompaniment of time after alteration from one accompaniment of no time / change accompaniment to that accompaniment of time / change after in actuality agreeable in alteration and alteration in banausic framework?

JK – “And so no, I still anticipate there is no bigger affirmation for a simulation antecedent over a god hypothesis, if that agency that a ‘software programmer’ accept to be a non-god like us.”

JP – I’ll accord an archetype area the Simulation Antecedent is logically bigger than the God Hypothesis. There is in actuality no way the Sun and the Moon could accept stood still in the sky as allowable by Joshua. If that had absolute happened, you wouldn’t be actuality today and neither would annihilation and anyone else. However, if that were just a simulation, appropriate effects, able-bodied that’s a altered kettle of fish.

JK – “The absoluteness is that we will never apperceive what the attributes of any ‘creator’ adeptness be like, unless they appear themselves to us. And here, there adeptness be a adoration that claims that the architect has. And we would charge to counterbalance up those claims on whatever area they’re claimed upon!”

JP – If there was a adoration that claimed that a celestial has appear itself to us, able-bodied 1) that affirmation would be extraneous aback we’d already apperceive of that adumbration in no ambiguous terms, but 2) any adoration authoritative such a affirmation has the accountability of affidavit to prove that their affirmation is true. Clearly that hasn’t happened contrarily there would be no charge for added accord on the matter. I’m reminded actuality that if you ambition to apperceive what is amiss with Adoration X, again ask somebody from Adoration Y and carnality versa.

JK – “Further, there is a aberration amid acceptance something and cerebration something is the best cessation to all the evidence. You don’t accept to verify something in say, a accurate sense, to anticipate there is acceptable affirmation for something, or that it’s reasonable/plausible to accept it – or at least, added believable to accept than some added alternative. But that aswell doesn’t beggarly anybody will be assertive by it. We all accept our unprovable assumptions, and about every cessation is logically accidental – philosophically speaking.”

JP – I accept to agenda actuality that there tends to be one science based about the best affirmation and that science tends to be absolute of bounded regions. The aforementioned isn’t accurate for religious acceptance systems. Japan would be awfully altered about to Canada; India isn’t of the aforementioned religious mix as say Brazil. Aback there are in actuality multi-thousands of religions, even bags of variations on the capital leash of monotheistic religions, again there accept to be multi-thousands of sets of evidence, anniversary set altered to a greater or bottom admeasurement from every added set. That in actuality doesn’t allege able-bodied for the affirmation accepting abnormally “good”. Let’s be honest, every accepter in any one religion’s set of deities (or deity) is an agnostic if it comes to every added religion’s set of deities (or deity). A physicist in say Australia is not an agnostic if it comes to the absolute hardcore affirmation for a new analysis in physics in New Zealand. You can’t say that about religious behavior if comparing / allegory say Iran and Saudi Arabia.

JP (quoted by JK) – “What we now alarm age-old Egyptian acceptance or age-old Greek / Roman acceptance wasn’t acceptance to the age-old Egyptians or to the ancients Greeks or Romans.”

JK – “But they are still fabulous religions by nature. Doesn’t beggarly that humans didn’t in actuality accept them. Perhaps you are application the chat ‘myth’ to call a broadly held, but apocryphal idea. I am application the chat to call the attributes of a acceptance – as in, ‘a acceptable adventure acclimated to explain things’. These stories, admitting broadly believed to be true, don’t accept any absolute affirmation to aback them up. But not all religions are as simple to beating down as that. For instance, ‘mainstream’ scholarship doesn’t abolish Christianity’s claims about Jesus on fabulous grounds. They are debated on actual and abstract grounds. One adeptness say they are just acceptance like all added religions, but that will not be absolute acceptable to an able believer.”

JP – If some religions are mythological, why not all of them? The age-old Greeks in actuality did accept in the actuality of the Olympians and fabricated pilgrimages to the Oracle at Delphi to argue with Apollo. The age-old Egyptians in actuality did accept in Horus, Isis and Osiris and how their gods and goddesses would adjudicator them afore casual them on (or not) to their afterlife. The age-old Incas in actuality did accept in Viracocha who was absolute abundant a Jesus figure. There are abounding parallels of added entities affiliated to Jesus appropriately not authoritative Jesus a altered entity. For example, there’s the acceptance and legends apropos the birth, life, afterlife and awakening surrounding Horus, Attis, Krishna, Dionysus, Mithra, Osiris, Adonis, Romulus, Inanna, Zalmoxis and even Hercules. If these are entities are mythical, why not Jesus? You do apprehend that there is no non-Biblical antecedent that can be anachronous to 1 AD to say 50 AD that even mentions Jesus. Area are the age-old Roman annal that accord with the balloon and beheading of Jesus? Nowhere to be found.

JK – “Your point was that we should apprehend acceptance in all religions to achromatize the aforementioned way as behavior in altered fabulous religions accept faded. But my point is that the acumen behavior in those religions accept achromatic doesn’t so calmly administer to all religions.”

JP – There are some age-old religions that accept now achromatic abroad that in actuality lasted best than our leash of monotheistic faiths. So, there’s time yet.

JK – “This doesn’t beggarly acceptance in these added religions will not aswell fade. But alone that your altercation suggesting it will, isn’t absolute convincing… to me at least.”

JP – Religious acceptance beyond the lath is abbreviating admitting not appropriately in every region. In any event, you do apprehend that beyond at atomic the Christian world, the acceleration of the “no religion” band is on the abiding increase. In actuality based on the 2016 Australian census, “no religion” was the arch box ticked of all the assorted religions offered up on the demography form. You adeptness be acquainted that the American bourgeois fundamentalist / evangelistic Christian association goes on and on and on about how they are accepting afflicted by the non-believers, by the LGBT community, by pro-choice advocates, etc. Some Christians feel afflicted if they aren’t accustomed the abandon to afflict others by advance down the throats of non-Christians their acceptance and their morals. While the U.S. is still a absolute religious country, “no religion” is accepting there as able-bodied and Europe has already become predominately a abutment of nations of about little religious faith. While there is no one acumen for that, affidavit could be that the apple is accepting added accomplished abnormally with the acceleration of the Internet; science gets way added advantage in the media and has a far added absolute access on our lives now about to 500 years ago; that End of Canicule / Second Coming just never seems to eventuate which rather tests the acceptance to breaking point; religious wars and conflicts don’t affect abundant aplomb in religions; and of advance there accept been abundant church-related scandals that accomplish headlines. What’s God done for me afresh – or ever? Probably not absolute much. What’s Sony, Microsoft, Apple, etc. done for me lately? An abominable lot added at atomic in agreement of claimed achievement and adeptness to digest with what’s accident in absolute time.

JK – “Believing or not assertive in god isn’t bent by how able or rational one is. There are affluence of simple and ablaze minds on all abandon of the debate. And remember, about any cessation is logically avoidable. It all depends on your starting presupposition.”

JP – Acceptance is not a alleyway to accuracy behindhand of how simple or how brilliant, how rational or able you are.

JP (cont.) – But ultimately it doesn’t in actuality amount if your architect was Mother Nature, a celestial or a computer programmer. Your actuality is your actuality is your actuality – it is what it is what it is what it is and you are blank to change it.