Let's perform a thought experiment: "Create a world of your own"

[lelinator]

“You have sufficient power to create a physical universe. What would you do?”

So here’s the really, really deep question. Is this reality simply the result of your mind actually attempting to do that?

 

[whatistrue]

we remove ‘being eaten alive’, can you seriously ask if that’s better

If one being eaten alive frees up enough food for 10 (or even 2) to avoid death by starvation, would that not be better for the species as a whole?

 

[lelinator]

Is that a serious question?

Of course it’s a serious question. Would there still be starvation, if not, how is it that your world is magically maintaining equilibrium, given the possibility of overpopulation. Maintaining a natural balance between supply and demand could prove to be tricky.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

They become fertilizer for the plants

And the process for that to happen requires that something eat them in some way, but you have eliminated the consumption of flesh by decreeing no carnivores.

Hey, I see what you just did. You want to class bacteria as carnivores. Good point. A winner I’d say. It makes me adjust my position to exempt scavengers. But do bacteria count as scavengers? Not sure myself. But I’m sure you’ll help me fine tune my position so that you are satisfied.

Back to you for some more fine tuning!

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

Is that a serious question?

Of course it’s a serious question. Would there still be starvation, if not, how is it that your world is magically maintaining equilibrium, given the possibility of overpopulation. Maintaining a natural balance between supply and demand could prove to be tricky.

The guy controlling all this is omnipotent. Should be easy.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

we remove ‘being eaten alive’, can you seriously ask if that’s better

If one being eaten alive frees up enough food for 10 (or even 2) to avoid death by starvation, would that not be better for the species as a whole?

I think that you don’t understand the concept. We are each omnipotent persons designing our own world. If we are omnipotent tgen we can organise things so that it works any way we want.

Unless you think that an omnipotent being is restricted in some way. Which kinda puts into doubt the very meaning of the word omnipotent.

 

[lelinator]

The guy controlling all this is omnipotent. Should be easy.

Do your animals evolve? Do they evolve to fill available environmental niches? Does one of those niches involve the eating of other animals?

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

The guy controlling all this is omnipotent. Should be easy.

Do your animals evolve? Do they evolve to fill available environmental niches? Does one of those niches involve the eating of other animals?

Yes. Yes. And no.

 

[lelinator]

lelinator:

Do your animals evolve? Do they evolve to fill available environmental niches? Does one of those niches involve the eating of other animals?

Yes. Yes. And no.

Why not?

Yes, I understand that you’re omnipotent, but the question is could you design a world in which your ideal world would naturally maintain itself without your constant intervention?

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

lelinator:

Do your animals evolve? Do they evolve to fill available environmental niches? Does one of those niches involve the eating of other animals?

Yes. Yes. And no.

Why not?

Yes, I understand that you’re omnipotent, but the question is could you design a world in which your ideal world would naturally maintain itself without your constant intervention?

Yes. Becase…I am omnipotent. And who says I can’t intervene now and then? A lot of Christians say that their God does. I reserve that right.

 

[whatistrue]

I think that you don’t understand the concept

No. I get it, and I accepted your dictum of no carnivores. I just tried to point out some of the possible issues with such a change, absent any other changes to compensate.

You want to class bacteria as carnivores

Not all, just the ones involved in decomposing or otherwise consuming flesh.

fine tune my position so that you are satisfied

Frankly, that alone is enough to satisfy me. I don’t really have an agenda, and I have no desire to world build on my own, I just wanted to demonstrate that it really isn’t a simple thing to do and any change to the way things work here and now involve many other changes, many of which us mere humans aren’t going to catch on our own. Hence the need for omniscience to go with the omnipotence.

 

[lelinator]

Yes. Becase…I am omnipotent. And who says I can’t intervene now and then? A lot of Christians say that their God does. I reserve that right.

Fair enough, but then again, you don’t believe in such a God, or His intervention, right? Would you make your intervention a bit more obvious?

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

I think that you don’t understand the concept

No. I get it, and I accepted your dictum of no carnivores. I just tried to point out some of the possible issues with such a change, absent any other changes to compensate.

You want to class bacteria as carnivores

Not all, just the ones involved in decomposing or otherwise consuming flesh.

fine tune my position so that you are satisfied

Frankly, that alone is enough to satisfy me. I don’t really have an agenda, and I have no desire to world build on my own, I just wanted to demonstrate that it really isn’t a simple thing to do and any change to the way things work here and now involve many other changes, many of which us mere humans aren’t going to catch on our own. Hence the need for omniscience to go with the omnipotence.

So we’re good? You accept that an omnipotent being could create a world as I proposed? And you fine tuned?

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

Yes. Becase…I am omnipotent. And who says I can’t intervene now and then? A lot of Christians say that their God does. I reserve that right.

Fair enough, but then again, you don’t believe in such a God, or His intervention, right? Would you make your intervention a bit more obvious?

I’m not really concerned one way or the other.

 

[lelinator]

I’m not really concerned one way or the other.

Except for the fact that some of your creatures might come to believe that you exist, and some of them might not, and we know what can happen then.

On the other hand, just give your favorite creatures omniscience as well. That might solve the problem, or maybe create a worse one.

 

[whatistrue]

I would say that I accept that an omnipotent being could create a world with the difference you proposed, so long as said being was also omniscient and included every other difference from ours that would be required to make it work in practice. I have no idea myself what those requirements are, but I would classify it as complete redesign rather than fine tuning.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

I’m not really concerned one way or the other.

Except for the fact that some of your creatures might come to believe that you exist, and some of them might not, and we know what can happen then.

I think the thought experiment was to see if we could design a different world. I just did. As the designer I could care less what my creation believes.

 

[Bradskii]

I would say that I accept that an omnipotent being could create a world with the difference you proposed, so long as said being was also omniscient and included every other difference from ours that would be required to make it work in practice. I have no idea myself what those requirements are, but I would classify it as complete redesign rather than fine tuning.

We’re not fine tuning. We can create whatever we want. We don’t have to rely on what’s been before. We’re omnipotent. Isn’t my world better?

 

[FaithRuir]

To make a new world and its physics, I think I’ll just pick up a Bible for instructions

 

[Bradskii]

To make a new world and its physics, I think I’ll just pick up a Bible for instructions

So the world as written about in the bible is the best if all possible worlds?