An interesting question: can you even "get out" of a simulation like that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirteenth_Floor
Scientists are testing that we are in the Matrix...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirteenth_Floor
Do you work on curing cancer then?
Can't these guys work on something more important? Like curing cancer? Such a waste of brilliant minds.
Should all game developers work on curing cancer?
Just because someone is skilled in one area, doesn't mean they would be in another.
Aren't there more important things to do than posting to this forum?
As an aside, few atheists "definitively deciding there is no god" either - the choice of what to label oneself is comes down to personal preference and semantics ("agnostic" can be misleading too, as it strictly means someone who claims we can't know if there is a god - i.e., not a position of belief either way, and also itself a claim).
Except that definitively deciding there is no god is making the same logical fallacy and equally arrogant. This is why I'm agnostic. Even if I personally feel there is no god, I can't say that with 100% certainty because I'm only human and there are limits to the human brain.
Cogito ergo sum " I am thinking, therefore I exist " ~ René DescartesIs that the same Descartes that said animals have no souls and therefore do not suffer pain?
Though in the sense of a simulated universe, this actually makes sense. If everything is simulated, so are animals and any pain they might have. So the pain would not be real. The same would be true for time too, which might explain why time passes so quickly sometimes, and goes so slowly at other times.
If this experiment bears out, won't it stand as proof of intelligent design? If we are in a simulation, someone designed that simulation. Maybe that's what God is: the designer of the simulation we run in.
Even if all that were true, it still wouldn't stand as proof of intelligent design, at least not in the sense of diversification of species. Intelligent design holds that some entity designed all the species that exist. All the available evidence contradicts this. If the simulation hypothesis was true it's far more likely that "god" set the initial parameters and then let the simulation play out, with us evolving within the simulation.
The only way it would be truly "intelligent design" would be if the programmer designed all the entities within the simulation, i.e. they were hard coded rather than procedurally generated. In which case, it's extremely likely that all of pre-history is untrustworthy, depending on at what point the simulation was started. But if you accept that, you have to accept that the simulation could have started at any point (i.e. it could have started right......NOW) with all our memories and data simply initialised from some set start state and left to run from there.
]That's not necessarily true; you are kind of assuming that all proponents of intelligent design believe the same thing. It's somewhat like saying, "all people who believe in reincarnation believe in [some religions specific view of reincarnation]". Intelligent design as a phrase has grown to encompass more than just the most stereotypical explanation of it, at least among people I know who are proponents of it (myself included). I always viewed it as a situation where it was like a massive set of dominoes where God set up the dominos and then set them in motion. IN AN UNRELATED THING, I cannot get new lines in any of my posts. Does anyone know what might cause that? Anytime I press enter it does nothing.
Even if all that were true, it still wouldn't stand as proof of intelligent design, at least not in the sense of diversification of species. Intelligent design holds that some entity designed all the species that exist. All the available evidence contradicts this. If the simulation hypothesis was true it's far more likely that "god" set the initial parameters and then let the simulation play out, with us evolving within the simulation.
That's not necessarily true; you are kind of assuming that all proponents of intelligent design believe the same thing. It's somewhat like saying, "all people who believe in reincarnation believe in [some religions specific view of reincarnation]". Intelligent design as a phrase has grown to encompass more than just the most stereotypical explanation of it, at least among people I know who are proponents of it (myself included). I always viewed it as a situation where it was like a massive set of dominoes where God set up the dominos and then set them in motion.
Sorry, but no. You're trying to redefine the terms of the argument. Saying that god set the initial parameters is not intelligent design, at least not as it's commonly understood. Intelligent design specifically states that the process of species "evolution" is guided by an external entity.
It's kinda like saying "I'm a vegetarian! I mean, I eat a lot of meat but I support animal rights".
So if it turns out that we're living in a computer simulation, do I still have to go in to work?
So if it turns out that we're living in a computer simulation, do I still have to go in to work?
I never really understood this thinking, even if we discover we are in a simulation, that doesn't change anything, you still require inputs in order to survive(rather being a simulated being or not, you exist in some shape/form), so unless discovering we are in a simulation makes the simulators decide to end all of our problems, and give us everything we want. then yes, you still have to go to work if you want to continue existing.
Sorry, but no. You're trying to redefine the terms of the argument. Saying that god set the initial parameters is not intelligent design, at least not as it's commonly understood. Intelligent design specifically states that the process of species "evolution" is guided by an external entity.
This is how this just went.
1. Argument assuming X is Y.
2. Argument stating X has grown to be inclusive of more than just Y despite it being commonly understood as just Y.
3. Argument that X is Y because it is commonly understood as Y.
It's totally ignorant of any number of writings by figures in the Catholic church.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
