575
submitted 10 months ago by darcy@sh.itjust.works to c/memes@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ExLisper@linux.community 101 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The "belief" we're in a simulation is more like a interesting idea than something people organize their lives around. Is it possible? Yes. Am I going to praise the great programmer every Sunday? No.

The belief in God in most cases is not just belief in some general higher power but a very specific deity with weird morality, silly mythology and bunch of scam artists behind it.

  • I think there's a higher power...
  • Ok...
  • that got mad at us for eating fruits but then impregnated a lady with itself and pissed us off so that we murdered him and he could say he's not mad anymore.
  • ... WTF?
[-] 5wim@slrpnk.net 13 points 10 months ago

I more or less agree, but you keep using "believe" when you ought to use "belief." Just FYI.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] RIPandTERROR 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Could an all powerful, loving God be real? Sure. Why not?

Could a powerful, all loving God be real? Yeah, seems realistic. In many ways, I am a God to an ant.

Could an all powerful all loving God be real?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha no.

God is either inept, indifferent, or a straight up ass. None of those items are something I care to worship, even at the threat of the eternal damnation.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] dpkonofa@lemmy.world 70 points 10 months ago

There’s no hypocrisy here.

On one hand, the belief in a god doesn’t just end there. There are beliefs in what that god does and what he has control over. So it’s completely logical to believe that there’s no god (although, as someone else pointed out, it’s also not random arrangements of atoms).

On the other hand, simulation theory is a logical theory to rationalize the “purpose” of why we exist. It’s not a belief. The simulation doesn’t respond to prayers or requests. It’s simply conjecture or hypothesis to explain the “why” of the universe. No one who talks about simulation theory (much less who “believes” in it) pretends that the creator of the simulation is uniquely interested in them and responds to their requests and tells them how to live their life. In fact, that would go against the entire concept of simulation theory.

Religion and religious belief have specific definitions. This feels just as dishonest as people claiming that LGBTQ ideology is a religion or that evolution is a “belief”.

[-] balderdash9@lemmy.zip 26 points 10 months ago

You're assuming belief in the Abrahamic God to make your argument easier. But not all theists subscribe to such a position. And belief in a disinterested god who created the universe seems just as plausible as believing in a disinterested programmer who wrote a simulation.

[-] conneru64 12 points 10 months ago

Those conjectures aren't just equally plausible, they're the same thing.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago

What is religion, if not conjecture about the origin of mankind (and by extension the universe) that people believe without evidence?

I don't think that religion is predicated on the answering of prayers, or in a Creator who takes a special interest in some particular human.

Also, I don't think that either of those go against simulation theory; what if you're a sim in some alien version of The Sims, and they're going around fuckin with your life, removing ladders from your pools, etc.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (65 replies)
[-] A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world 39 points 10 months ago

I've literally never met someone who claimed we actually live in a simulation though

[-] darcy@sh.itjust.works 16 points 10 months ago

yeah its a strawman (checkmate athiest)

[-] Russellbush@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

I saw a theory by some physicists that there is some evidence we may be a hologram but I'm not smart enough to understand exactly what that means. Sounds neat

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] User_4272894@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Musk said it in Rogan a few weeks ago, and it became a justified belief overnight. It had huge flaws in logic when he said it, and no one who is parroting the talking point today is thinking beyond "the real life Ironman says we live in the matrix".

[-] K0W4LSK1@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Pretty sure simulation theory has been around since the late 80s. Just not in the main media zeitgeist anymore like when matrix came out so Elon just revived it in mainstream media

[-] User_4272894@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I mean, Descartes had brain in a vat theories well before the 1980s, and Plato's allegory of the cave is fundamentally the same. My position was that "the reason we're talking about it again all of a sudden is because one idiot got on the podcast of another idiot and poorly explained it to the throngs of their uncritical fans".

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 33 points 10 months ago

They are similar in that neither are scientific theories, as they are equally non-falsifiable. We may live in a universe where it is impossible to see the face of god or a glitch in the matrix by construction.

Given that impossibility, how then could you perform an experiment or make an observation that contradicts the theory? To be reductive, science isn't about proving. It's failing to disprove. If there isn't a set of circumstances in which a theory can be disproven, it isn't scientific.

Unless you are a string theorist. Then you just say whatever the hell you want.

[-] Tetra@kbin.social 28 points 10 months ago

Idk what's the exact purpose of this meme but I really do see a lot of similarities between God creating the world and simulation theory. Obviously ST and religion are wildly different in their impact on society and how many people genuinely believe in them, but ST is pretty silly too.

It's just a "what if" scenario, one that's potentially possible but wouldn't change or explain anything if it was true. All you're doing is moving the existential problems up a layer and forgetting about it, it's the same as saying God made us: at the end of the day both the beings in charge of the simulation AND God have to come from somewhere, they live in a "real" universe, and you're not explaining that.

Why can't it be that we simply live in a real universe? That's the simplest answer, the one that requires the fewest assumptions. It doesn't have a convenient, satisfying reason as to why we're here, or how reality came to be, but it's easily the most plausible.

[-] m0darn@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago

Why can't it be that we simply live in a real universe? That's the simplest answer, the one that requires the fewest assumptions.

The argument goes that: a sufficiently technologically advanced society would run ancestor simulations. Those simulations may also run simulations. There's no ceiling on the number of nesting simulations. It's the height of conceit to think we're the top level when there are squillions of simulated universe.

https://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2535

[-] Tetra@kbin.social 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

"there are squillions of simulated universe."

Huge assumption there lol, but I guess I see your point. If you assume simulations of this scope and quality are possible (again HUGE assumption), then your odds of being in one go up a lot, obviously.

Again though, at some point you have to hit actual, non simulated reality, and when everything seems to point towards that being the case for us, and absolutely nothing hints at a simulation, I don't see why we couldn't just be in that actual reality. I can't help but see that thought experiment as just an attempt to answer "the big question" in some way, even though in actuality it just moves it out of view.

It's Russell's teapot, impossible to disprove and theorically possible, but there's nothing backing it up besides fantastical assumptions. In that regard yeah, I think the comparison with God is warranted. The creators of our simulation, and especially the ones up above that are actually real would need such absurd levels of technology so far beyond our comprehension that it would be magic to us, and they would absolutely be our Gods.

I don't see much of a difference, it's kind of just a tech themed spin on it, with the same fallacies plaguing the whole concept, IMO. It's cool to think and write scifi about, but that's about it.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] DumbAceDragon@sh.itjust.works 27 points 10 months ago

I don't think anyone actually believes the latter except room temperature IQ tech bros. It's mostly just a hypothetical.

[-] nexguy@lemmy.world 25 points 10 months ago

One of those is a belief and the other is a theory.

One requires the absence of evidence and the other requires evidence.

[-] daFRAKKINpope@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Okay. But no. You can find evidence of god or a simulation the same way. Confirmation bias. There is no way to prove either belief.

[-] nexguy@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

If you try to prove the existence of a god then you do not have faith so you are not a believer. Having faith in itself means evidence has no value for you.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] voidMainVoid@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago

Are you a farmer? Because you have an awful lot of straw!

[-] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 17 points 10 months ago

Does anyone base their lives and their worldviews around the simulation theory?

[-] themelm@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago

Its such a philosophical dead end. I know a few people who really want the world to be a simulation but I cant understand why. I think they want an excuse to have nothing matter and be shitty.

But i would not live my life any differently if we found out that this is a simulation. Because its still real to me and there's no reason to believe I can exist outside the simulation any more than my sims can exist outside the game.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 10 months ago

bad religion bait post is bad

[-] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 13 points 10 months ago

Uh, not random. Evolution has a system.

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 9 points 10 months ago

Evolution is just random. The "system" is just the good random changes live and the bad don't.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

Both are just as unlikely as the other and have as much evidence, I'd find anyone who possesed both beliefs to be weird.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] AngrilyEatingMuffins@kbin.social 10 points 10 months ago

Damn theists really are fucking morons, huh?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Poggervania@kbin.social 8 points 10 months ago

both have people believe humans are part of a greater design

both include some otherworldly figure either observing or mandating how we live our lives

both reject the idea that maybe we’re just fuckin’ here because we are just fuckin’ here

Love how some people are legitimately proving this meme in the comments.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Godric@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Makes me miss my old roommate, who didn't believe in God but believed this all could be a simulation. Hope you're doing well buddy, wherever the fuck you've wandered!

[-] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's always the worst people who believe this too. The only interpretation of Simulation Theory that I will even remotely entertain is the one that we're all information stuck on the surface of a black hole, because it's the only one that isn't just there to feed tech bros' god complex.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] minnieo@kbin.social 8 points 10 months ago

honestly, who is this targeting? conspiracy theorists?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] hondaguy97386@sh.itjust.works 7 points 10 months ago

...but we're not just random arrangements of atoms...

[-] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

Not with THAT kind of attitude!

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] confluence@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Dr. Blitz called Simulation Theory religion for tech bros and I can't get it out of my head 😅

[-] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Oooohhooho. You really touched a nerve on this one.

[-] quackers 6 points 10 months ago

it's not a fair comparison, in the sense that the religions people tens to not believe in are those with disputable claims in a book dictated by god.
Caims such as simulation theory or unspecified god without evidence for or against it make way more sense than major deistic religions. And again, that's not to say it's true, its just significantly more likely to be accurate.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
575 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

45601 readers
1133 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS