view the rest of the comments
Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
Belief in a simulation implies intelligent design of some sort, so this is, in my opinion, just a 21st century way of asking the age old question, does God exist?
God is a loaded term though. Yes there would be a creator but it could be a completely passive observer.
Why would being in a simulation require that those who create or maintain it only observe?
Edit: I misread, merely observing is certainly a possibility.
Not OP, but they said “but it could be”, not that it is required.
The modern Christian God is mostly a passive observer, whenever him or his agents have visited us there have been tons of miracles and magical shit, but that does not happen very often, and we've been basically alone for millenia while He is busy in his own realm. If Christ visited again, it would likely portend the end of the world, at least in a lot of Christian world views.
Christians are shitty con-artists who spread their filth by lying to, subverting, and intimidating others.
I'll never get over how they call the Torah the "old testament." They do this as a sneaky way to make it seem like it's all Christianity with no ties to Judaism.
He might be passive but the implication is that you're supposed to live certain way or you'll end up in hell. This most likely isn't the case in a simulation.
The world already ended, and all that jazz. Happened in 1844. Just look around you. If you brought a "modern homosapien" from 12,000 years ago to the year 1800 or even 1840-1850, they would recognize things from their world. Those things may have had eons of refinement, but a horse is still mostly a horse. Bring a modern human from 1850 to today, and they will recognize almost nothing. Their world is gone. A new one took its place, as was predicted.
Oh no! All my thoughts and prayers!
That's no different than saying the universe is a simulation.
Or we are NPCs in a game played by a 9 year old.
Maybe it implies intelligent design, but I don't think that it implies that we are a part of that intelligent design, necessarily. I mean there's a whole universe out there that's mostly just hot hydrogen and the space in-between with spacetime shaped accordingly. Who's to say that life on earth isn't just noise? Outside the scope of whoever is running the simulation? It would seem like a waste to calculate a whole universe through all of time specifically to study the great apes of earth.
I'm inclined to believe that if our universe is running on a machine in a higher universe, it's for something bigger than us, and its operator is likely not specifically aware of this galaxy, let alone us humans as individuals. Given the consistency we observe, any intelligent design would only be in the laws of physics and perhaps the initial conditions of the universe, everything else would be calculated based on those from there.
We need to be careful not to be too human-centric in these discussions, because every human-centric theory of the universe that humanity has come up with so far was eventually proven wrong.
@midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone @OneSpectra@lemmy.world
A simulated cosmos wouldn't necessarily imply an elder bearded endomorph man in light robe and sandals, surrounded by blue-winged curly-haired kids. The Conway's Game of Life is an interesting example of order emerged out of chaos with no sentient intervention at all, just randomness.
What we know as "randomness" is actually a complex interplay of countless factors, adding up to the "random". The double pendulum experiment is also a great example of that.
Then, there are esoteric beliefs that don't oppose to Science but, rather, bring scientific concepts seasoned with a bit of mythopoetic meaning-making.
For example: Ordo ab Chao is a concept stating that everything is just order that emerged from a primordial chaos. Science tells us how life is a result of dynamic physical and chemical interactions known as Evolution, and how celestial bodies are a result of similar dynamic known as stellar formation.
Science doesn't know how exactly said interactions took place (e.g. could amino-acids have been produced outside Earth's oceans, such as brought by asteroids as part of panspermia? Science can't be sure about that, yet). There's where esoteric comes.
Esoteric, or at least what I believe to myself, tries to see things as close to Science as possible. In fact, if we consider Cosmicism (Lovecraft), we end up perceiving how the universe is simply uncaring, and how we're definitely not the center of the existence as anthropocentrism leads us to think.
And this indifference doesn't necessarily imply "no belief". There can be awareness of cosmic indifference and lack of divine intervention, AND the belief that the all fundamenta of existence emerged from some tug-of-war between transcendental principles (e.g. Yin-Yang, Darkness-Light, Chaos-Order). Transcendental principles and forces beyond the moral duality of good and evil, but transcendental nevertheless.
To a certain extent. that's what I believe: indifferent, cosmic principles that neither care about humans nor about any life in general, they simply are.
It doesn't necessarily imply I couldn't worship those forces as one could worship the vastness of cosmos. In my case, I worship the "darker" aspects of it, the "destructive" and "deconstructive" aspects, the chaotic pole of Ordo ab Chao.
I personally call this aspect by many names, from entropy (the physical tendency to disorder) to Lilith (Mighty Sumerian Goddess of storms who later became part of Jewish esotericism) and Her "masculine" counterpart Lucifer (no introduction needed; the rebellious principle of the very "Architect" behind existence).
The latter also shows how the belief that God exists doesn't necessarily implies worshiping said God. I do believe God exists as cosmic principle of order, but I'm not gonna worship him, because "his" order feels so forced and fleeting. Rather, I prefer to worship the forces opposing said order, the Chaos, the Darkness, Her.
nah
What, did the simulator get assembled by a passing tornado? Everyone who believes in simulation theory thinks this reality was designed, constructed, usually by someone that looks like us. That's pretty damn close to Christianity.