The Simulation Argument, Brains in Vats and Digital Physics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cosmyk
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
We call what we sense reality, simulation is the imitation of reality, if we sense a perfect simulation of reality then we would not know the difference between reality and simulation, if that makes sense. And if the latter was the case it really wouldn’t matter whether it was reality or a perfect simulation of reality.

We are limited by our physical senses, I don’t have a Geiger counter in my head, I don’t see ultra violet without augmentation. We are confined within our sensual limits without recourse to intelligence. It could be argued I suppose that since God created all things He created this simulation of reality we experience whereby the ‘real world’ is knowable only by Him and perhaps we shall glimpse that actual reality after death of the flesh.

My intelligence points me towards God and one day I’m sure we’ll undestand when we are no longer confined to organic limitations.
 
PaladinSword said:
Should fear the secular non believers more than anyone who has any spectacular philosophies. We are limited and enslaved by false sense of normality and conformity more than anything spectacular or supernatural because I think transcendent things tend to be things that liberate us rather than enslave us.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree. Secular non-believers and atheists base the world-view on facts and evidence. They follow logical and rational policies. It is the radical religious people we should fear. They make decisions based on “faith”, which has no justification or logic.

This doesn’t mean there won’t be evil and crazy non-believers. It will just be that you’ll see them coming from miles away. It will be the religious fanatic that will bring evil that we won’t see until it is too late.
 
PaladinSword said:
Christianity seems pretty solid to me… though today I feel quite jaded and disappointed for emotional reasons… I cannot disprove any hope I have out of logic or reason and that gives me some strength.
Click to expand...
I don’t share your view. I also feel jaded for other reasons (homophobia, sexism, sex abuse, the drive to conservatism that subverts Christian values, etc). But in keeping with the topic, I personally do NOT think Christian theology is on strong footing. Some examples:
  • Archaeology and textual analysis of the Bible are rendering most of Judeo-Christian history invalid. Examples include the Exodus, Virgin Birth, biblical miracles, etc.
  • Theism cannot withstand the metaphysical attacks from non-believers. You are fooling yourself if you think it does. Deism perhaps can - and you can redefine some Christian principles as Deist. Many do. But then you are no longer a Christian, at least on paper.
  • Moral foundations that made sense centuries ago are not updated with modern understanding.
 
Last edited:
Please don’t be offended but I’m reminded of
Matthew 13:12 “Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.”

There are plenty of modern miracles which point to the possibility that biblical miracles were possible and I feel that the miracles in the New Testament are true. If such miracles are true they point to a force or energy which we have not detected, and that is linked to the Holy Spirit.

The thread is about ‘reality’ what you believe to be true is true. I believe in the existence of magnetism and electricity and so forth because they are demonstrably true, miracles have occurred and so I believe in the existence of something which I cannot sense.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps then I am the dangerous religious fanatic because I have more than faith or evidence I have experience. Now transmitting that experience to others or verifying it is where things get hairy. Also it was my understanding that archaeology does support the biblical narrative.

Now whether experience is genuine or I am just insane well that could be a matter of opinion without some group consensus by most standards… but I will say that I have enough faith in my God to stand alone.

Thing is. A long time ago I was quite tempted to be a deist. A deist believes God exists but does not participate in his creation… how that would support any of your doubt as a better claim for the scenario described i dont quite understand your position on that.

I am no longer capable of being a deist because of a radical experience of God… I could only doubt my faith through doubt of my sanity but in my experience I am not the only person who has gone through these things and God is not the author of error or confusion… so I have to think that any inclination to doubt comes from the world which does not believe or believes and refuses to acknowledge for justification of sin or from the devil. So I do not fear the unbelievers in the sense that I am afraid of them or they have power. It’s that if I go casting further pearls they shall turn against me and cause my mortal self to suffer. A lot of this discussion has been hypothetical… well I still stand that Christianity especially the Catholic faith is quite logical when understanding reason philosophically and inherent morality… why it operates the way it does is another mystery. Lately I almost don’t want to believe anymore because I suffer… well I can’t chose not to believe in something I simply know and experience to be true.
 
Lee1 said:
There are plenty of modern miracles which point to the possibility that biblical miracles were possible and I feel that the miracles in the New Testament are true. If such miracles are true they point to a force or energy which we have not detected, and that is linked to the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe in miracles. By definition, a miracle is the temporary subversion of physical laws. Specifically, there must be physical laws surrounding miracles, otherwise they would happen all the time. And of course, they don’t. For example - consider the Virgin Birth. What EXACTLY did occur? At time “A”, Mary was not pregnant. At time “C”, she was. So what EXACTLY happened at time “B”? Did the Holy Spirit reach into her ovary, manifest a physical ‘probe’ that released an egg, then individually adjust each gene to simulate pregnancy? The point is that because physical laws are in effect at point A and C, there MUST be a physical description of what occurred at time B. Once you realize this, it is very hard to believe in miracles.

Now, that doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. And here it is my chance to ask that you not be offended. But I feel miracles are crutches invoked by those without the drive, desire, or intellectual curiosity to justify their beliefs using reason and logic alone. Today’s mundane occurrence is yesterday’s miracle. To claim you believe in God “because of miracles” is basing your faith on a foundation of glass and straws.
 
The temporary subversion of physical laws. Physical laws exist by Gods grace for His purposes, they serve God and God cannot be, I believe, contained or restricted within a universe which He himself created.

Point B I believe happened on a quantum level, no probes, Holy Spirit.

I was told when young that Christianity and religion was just a crutch. I believed that too…until I got older and it occurred to me that crutches are incredibly useful!

Our Lord showed people the power of God for good reason, to give evidence of the existence of a power so great that even the physical laws obey and are temporarily suspended. This was, I believe, was the reason for those miracles.

Our knowledge is incomplete and rightly so imo because we lack the wisdom and charity to employ it without error. How then can we know God in a scientific way.

Personally I stopped trying to use logic on the question of the existence of God, it defies the capabilities of mankind’s understanding.
 
Last edited:
From a purely philosophical point of view, the Simulation Hypothesis is a fruitless speculation.

If there is a reality in which we are merely simulations in a computer, or brains in vats, the truth of that reality is beyond our capacity to investigate it. Unless you want to add in a Matrix-like twist, like a red pill that brings us out of the simulation and gives us that capability. Or you could add an imperfection or inconsistency in the simulation that reveals that simulation, even as we remain in it. But barring those additions, the prospect of a perfect simulation i:s a worthless hypothesis, since it cannot be investigated. As Puddleglum said to the witch in The Silver Chair:
“One word, Ma’am," he said, coming back from the fire; limping, because of the pain. "One word. All you’ve been saying is quite right, I shouldn’t wonder. I’m a chap who always liked to know the worst and then put the best face I can on it. So I won’t deny any of what you said. But there’s one more thing to be said, even so. Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all those things-trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself. Suppose we have. Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones. Suppose this black pit of a kingdom of yours is the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one. And that’s a funny thing, when you come to think of it. We’re just babies making up a game, if you’re right. But four babies playing a game can make a play-world which licks your real world hollow. That’s why I’m going to stand by the play world. I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it. I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia. So, thanking you kindly for our supper, if these two gentlemen and the young lady are ready, we’re leaving your court at once and setting out in the dark to spend our lives looking for Overland. Not that our lives will be very long, I should think; but that’s a small loss if the world’s as dull a place as you say.”
Click to expand...
 
Lee1 said:
Our Lord showed people the power of God for good reason, to give evidence of the existence of a power so great that even the physical laws obey and are temporarily suspended. This was, I believe, was the reason for those miracles.
Click to expand...
My point about miracles is that if you base your faith on them, you eventually will be disappointed. Case in point, when Mother Teresa of Calcutta was canonized, the miracles published by the Church justifying her sainthood were investigated and debunked. The Church now no longer announces the sources for canonization miracles. There is also the story of thousands of people visiting a shrine in India where the Virgin Mother was seen crying, but it turns out sewage was dripping from ceiling pipes.

That’s not to say I don’t WANT miracles to occur. I certainly pray for them all the time. My key point is that I don’t base my faith on them. If it is determined that the Virgin Birth was a lie - I’m ok with it. If it is determined that the Resurrection never occurred - I’m ok with that too. Many will say I am then not a Christian. I guess - but at least I know my beliefs can be justified through logic and reason.
 
In my opinion we cannot know God in the way that you want. Our knowledge is incomplete and our transition is still underway.

I see miracles every day, I see the hand of God behind them. I think that science often reveals a little about how God creates and He uses ordinary available materials to do so, unsurprisingly, but this doesn’t make them any less miracles. Just because were familiar with the idea of say mitochondria and how they drive our heart muscle to continually beat doesn’t make them any less of a miracle. I don’t see a disconnect between God and science, science which is based on the disciplines which you require for belief.

Have faith brother, I’m sure that our Heavenly Father treasures your inquisition, all I’m sure will be reavealed.
Peace.
 
Last edited:
Science tells us about the universe just after the Big Bang. An incredibly hot universe, and yet on just this planet, which was also once molten rock, we see incredibly diversity of life forms including ourselves who are endowed with meta cognition! Intelligent life …raised from molten rock. Is that not miracle enough?
 
Last edited:
Lee1 said:
we see incredibly diversity of life forms including ourselves who are endowed with meta cognition! Intelligent life …raised from molten rock. Is that not miracle enough?
Click to expand...
Enough for what? to believe life is precious and a gift? Sure. You bet.

But enough to believe Christian theology and accept that its underlying problems should be absolved? Absolutely not.
 
With respect and I’m not concerned with being seen to be ‘right’ and I try to remember not to court the favour of men which isn’t easy I’d love to change your mind about this but I can go no further I regret but I’m more than happy knowing that God will find a way here.

Thank you for indulging me.
 
oldnskeptical said:
The programmer creates consciousness, and the consciousness creates reality.
Click to expand...
And guess who the programmer was! I’m sure that our reality is a tiny fraction of that of Our Heavenly Father and in that way I agree this is a virtual reality.

It seems of value to consider how complexity can arise from simple beginnings. It’s extremely difficult if not impossible to retrace from complex behaviour to the beginnings and so I would posit that for this reason we are incapable of understanding fully such phenomena. Whenever possible I try to simplify, I have to, It’s based on necessity!
 
Last edited:
The more likely scenario is that this is a virtual reality. One in which the program creates its own version of reality.
Click to expand...
Under Virtual reality, would a physical system in another reality still feed us sense data, because that seems identical to Simulation to me.
 
it’s possible that the consciousness created itself.
Click to expand...
From nothing, nothing comes. Nothing comes from nothing. From nothing, comes nothing. No matter how you phrase it, nothing can create itself.

Jokes aside, isn’t this Tom Campbell’s view?
 
Cosmyk said:
it’s possible that the consciousness created itself.
Click to expand...
I think he is referring to emergent phenomena. The idea is that consciousness suddenly “emerges” when a certain number of neurons fire collectively. For example, some theorize this occurs when around the age of 3 for a human being. This is why, for example, you have no memory prior to that age.

Also, in physics, something can come from nothing as long as net properties are zero. In fact, it happens all the time.
Click to expand...
 
vz71 said:
This is why, for example, you have no memory prior to that age.
Click to expand...
Animals act upon memory all the time. Are they conscious?
Also, I’m not saying I agree with the 2 year old theory. But I do think consciousness is an emergent phenomena dependent upon the number of firing interconnected neurons. That’s the best answer I’ve heard thus far, anyway.
Click to expand...
 
If intellect is an emergent property conscious awareness as we experience it would be. I don’t see a reason to think it is though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top