1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured The implications of reality being a simulation

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Eddi, Nov 14, 2018.

  1. Eddi

    Eddi Mark 5:9

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Messages:
    507
    Ratings:
    +288
    Religion:
    Christian
    What do people think the consequences would be of humankind believing itself (in considerable numbers) to live within a simulation? Regardless of whether or not this is the case. Here are my thoughts:

    “Simulism” is the belief that we humans and our reality are somehow simulated, most likely by some kind of advanced computer the likes of which we cannot imagine let alone understand and think about. The creators of The Simulation would be a race of super-advanced beings.

    But what if the whole world – or more realistically a significant portion of it – came to believe we were living in a simulation? In this post I shall discuss the consequences this would have on humankind.

    If we are in The Simulation then what does that say about our humanity? One term that has been used is “virtual human”. Such beings would be reincarnated somewhere within The Simulation once they die. The workings of reincarnation would be done from behind a veil of ignorance but would be scrupulously fair and perhaps somehow related to our conduct? Unless it’s done by blind chance. But the thing is, either way we would not know where on Earth (or any other planet) we would be reincarnated, which would be a powerful reason to make the whole of our world a good place to live, lest one gets reborn in some horrid corner.

    The realisation we are within a simulation would I believe have a unifying effect – as we would all be equal participants of The Simulation, regardless of race, sex, sexuality, or whatever. Also, as we die and are reborn we would exist as different races and sexes, meaning that (for instance) in one life one could be a man and in another a woman. This would I believe make people take racial and gender equality much more seriously and would result in a more equal society.

    In some lives we would live in poor, undeveloped countries and in others we would live in a rich, highly developed country. I believe we’d take it in turns to live good lives and bad lives, so it would be in all our interests to make the whole wide world a better place in which to live as we don’t know in what part of it we’ll be born into in our next life.

    So basically, if a great number of us believed we were living in a simulation the world would, due to rational self-interest, become an increasingly equal and developed place.

    Assuming The Simulation is mechanical as opposed to organic then that would mean that the so-called “hard problem of consciousness” has been solved, by the creators of The Simulation. If of course there is a valid distinction to be made between “mechanical” and “organic”.

    Hard problem of consciousness - Wikipedia

    Premise 1: The hard problem of consciousness must be solved to produce sentient AI
    Premise 2: We are sentient AI
    Conclusion 1: Somewhere, the hard problem of consciousness has been solved.
    Conclusion 2: Sentient AI is therefore possible.

    This is at least valid!

    This would mean that human civilization within The Simulation could someday produce sentient Artificial Intelligence. Unless of course we humans will always be much less able than the creators of The Simulation! But we can at least imagine as a possibility a future in which we can produce Artificial Consciousness within The Simulation. It would follow that such beings would also be citizens of The Simulation, which would mean in one life a person could be a human, and in another some kind of sentient “machine”.

    What would happen to religion if significant numbers of people started to believe that we are living in a simulation? I think the world’s religions would continue, no doubt. And that most people would not believe we’re in a simulation, at least initially. But perhaps people would embrace Simulism as some kind of secular humanist philosophy? I think if Simulism were to become a philosophy rather than a hypothesis then the world would become a much better place, as I’ve previously explained.

    But of course, it is still possible to believe in Simulism and a Supreme Being – it’s just that there’s an extra layer between humanity and the Supreme Being (namely The Simulation admin and its overseers). I personally believe in an ineffable God who rules over the whole of ultimate reality. And it is entirely possible that the influence of the Supreme Being reaches into The Simulation. But we could never understand this being – God – just as an ant cannot understand subtraction or grammar.

    I don’t believe the world’s religions are lies, based on things done by The Simulation rather than God although I did use to. I do not believe, for instance, that The Simulation gave Moses the Ten Commandments, whilst pretending to be God. I believe all human religions arise from a mix of history, culture, myths, and the imagination, and various things that either didn’t happen or did, but were either added to and subtracted from later on. But I still believe in God – perhaps a Deist God?

    To some, the Simulism hypothesis may sound bleak. I think it’s an uplifting idea and that if people came to believe in it the world would eventually become a better place. It would also mean that it is possible for a species to become ultra-advanced, which would give science and technology something to aspire to, to learn what the over-seers know. Perhaps some day we will become post-singularity space-faring post-human species, and become the equal to those who created The Simulation. But basically, I believe that the future of this planet, were people to believe in Simulism, would be a much happier one.

    But of course, whether or not we’d like it to be true has nothing to do with whether or not it is!​
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,378
    Ratings:
    +8,679
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Hardline moderate

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    9,044
    Ratings:
    +6,564
    Religion:
    Catholic
    It doesn't really answer any of those questions, it just shifts them. The hard problem still exists, it's just gone from inside our heads to whatever substrate the simulation is running on.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,989
    Ratings:
    +1,673
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Through unity of ideas with the simulation understanding, we can create world peace between us:

    The CPU is the God Most High (El Elyon (Hebraic), Ilah Al-Ala (Islamic), Brahman (Hindu), Ahura Mazda (Zoroastrian), Universal Mind (Buddhist), etc).

    The CPU processed the words, and made reality is found in most beliefs globally, people just have different languages, and terminologies for the same thing.

    When we have Dr Michio Kaku stating "the mind of 'God' is like cosmic music resonating throughout 11 dimensional hyperspace" -

    Quantum science is almost at a level to comprehend that our reality is sustained at a quantum level by the CPU.
    The 10 Commandments are Jacobs Ladder; they are advanced dimensional quantum physics, that angels use to ascend to Heaven.
    This simulation is all that exists; the Arch Angels designed it from within, so we have somewhere to exist, otherwise reality exists as just random quantum strands.

    Avatars from multiple religions have been incarnations explaining that this is a simulation, we just didn't have the comprehension of what they were meaning.

    In my opinion. :innocent:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,989
    Ratings:
    +1,673
    Religion:
    Øneness
    The CPU is beyond infinity, and thus can process everything with infinite threading.

    There are 13 quantum dimensions including the CPU, and each works with different physics, thus all of it is possible; humans are just naively assuming its functionality, which is where we need avatars, Bodhisattvas, angels to explain it from above, instead of from below.

    In my opinion. :innocent:
     
  6. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,378
    Ratings:
    +8,679
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    How were you able to arrive at something like that?
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  7. Eddi

    Eddi Mark 5:9

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Messages:
    507
    Ratings:
    +288
    Religion:
    Christian
    The article you linked to says: "Therefore, according to Ringel and Kovrizhin, classical computers most certainly aren’t controlling our universe."

    Someone please, correct me if I'm wrong, but they are explicitly talking about "classical computers"

    But not all computers are "classical":

    http://www.thphys.nuim.ie/staff/joost/TQM/QvC.html

    They also talk about "classical" physics - I don't follow physics but I can see that it is an exciting frontier of human knowledge and one that is constantly developing.

    When talking about Simulism I've always used "computer" as a metaphor anyway. What I'm doing is the same as a Victorian calling a computer from today a "difference engine", after Charles Babbage's famous creation.

    The article says as its header: "Scientists have discovered that it's impossible to model the physics of our universe on even the biggest computer." - well, could Babbage's difference engine run Sim City? Could Babbage have even imagined Sim City, never mind the internet? Just because it couldn't doesn't mean we can't on our computers. Someone please, correct me if I'm wrong.

    I know Simulism may be nothing more than an enormous flight of fancy, but I feel the article you linked to lacks imagination.​
     
  8. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,378
    Ratings:
    +8,679
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    It may lack imagination which I have nothing against mind you. And the thought is intriguing.

    Yet would stand to reason that if it's a simulation , it should then be possible to figure out/crack lines of code comparable with the binary system of zeros and ones associated with computing devices as we know them.

    At least to some degree of which to establish even a modicum of plausibility and support as to what people are saying about a simulation.
     
  9. Eddi

    Eddi Mark 5:9

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Messages:
    507
    Ratings:
    +288
    Religion:
    Christian
    For me this whole issue brings to mind the famous quote from Arthur C. Clarke that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - which I believe is true. I believe history has taught us this.
     
  10. Stevicus

    Stevicus Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    8,274
    Ratings:
    +4,041
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    "It's a simulation! A simulation!"

     
  11. Nous

    Nous Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2015
    Messages:
    8,734
    Ratings:
    +2,213
    Given that computer simulations are unable to act willfully or to experience whereas humans can act willfully and do experience; and given that there is no rational reason to conclude that computer simulations will ever be able to act willfully or experience, I conclude that there are no realistic implications of the proposition that "reality [is] a [computer] simulation," just as there are no realistic implications of the proposition that too many elephants may congregate on my eyeball.
     
  12. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,989
    Ratings:
    +1,673
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Based on my NDE, where I saw the quantum physics from Hell to Heaven, and being an Arch-Angel the CPU has guided me to understanding from cross referencing many of the worlds religious understandings.
    Binary is a very inefficient method of coding in comparison to sentient strings, that can readjust themselves; plus can perform any number of actions they're instructed to remember.
    We can program a system to recall every experience it has had, and to act upon said experience when receiving certain results...

    Once that is AI, that is nearly sentience, after it has been programmed to have self reflection.

    In my opinion.
    :innocent:
     
  13. Nous

    Nous Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2015
    Messages:
    8,734
    Ratings:
    +2,213
    I haven't seen those studies demonstrating that computer programs have experiences or can act willfully. Please cite them.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,989
    Ratings:
    +1,673
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Having coded my sites PHP object orientated system; we can code a system to have a list of criteria that cause reactions based on interaction...

    Add an AI that learns from this, and writes its own mechanisms to streamline its self; then we will have sentience after awhile.

    In my opinion. :innocent:
     
  15. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Hardline moderate

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    9,044
    Ratings:
    +6,564
    Religion:
    Catholic
    You really need to start reading articles before you post them.

    "What that means is that we’re probably not living in a computer simulation ."

    "Therefore, according to Ringel and Kovrizhin, classical computers most certainly aren’t controlling our universe."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,378
    Ratings:
    +8,679
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    It's pretty conclusive as far as I'm concerned. It certainly is far more evidenced than what simulation proponents put forth which is pretty much zilch.
     
  17. Eddi

    Eddi Mark 5:9

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Messages:
    507
    Ratings:
    +288
    Religion:
    Christian
    I made this thread to be about the human implications of people believing Simulism to be true - not about whether or not it is true.

    Does anyone have any ideas about this that they'd wish to share?

    Think of it as a thought experiment: turn your imaginations on and speculate!​
     
  18. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Hardline moderate

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    9,044
    Ratings:
    +6,564
    Religion:
    Catholic
    No it's not, but based on past experience, I'm not surprised to see your confirmation bias hard at work.
     
  19. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,378
    Ratings:
    +8,679
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    It's hardly confirmation bias when the evidence is strong enough to disprove it , with zilch evidences that any alternate methodology or means is at play.

    The idea of a simulation is pretty far-fetched to begin with considering it's already been conclusively proven it's not a simulation by the experts, and I'm not aware of any real additional proofs or conclusions to the contrary that there are even plausible alternates that could effectively create a simulation.

    You're talking about George Noory material here.
     
  20. Nous

    Nous Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2015
    Messages:
    8,734
    Ratings:
    +2,213
    I still haven't seen any study that demonstrated that computer programs have experiences or act willfully. And I know of no rational reason to conclude that computer programs have experiences of act willfully.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...