I used to consider my views aligned with agnostics, but after a life lived where mathematical anomalies become normalcy, the idea of this being a simulation and the existence of a creator become apparent. Don't let your dreams become memes.
Why yes...
Logan Hernandez
Liam Roberts
>be you
>create universe
you become "god" regardless of who you are in your reality. you are the creator of a universe... you are, what many humans would consider to be god.
Jaxon Howard
Quantum mechanics quite firmly establishes that the physical universe is not "real" in the sense that it is fundamental, "first" or the only thing, but that it emerges from something else that precedes it. This reality it emerges from is true fundamental reality, and is by definition supernatural (lit. beyond nature).
(It's technically possible that the supernatural reality we emerge from also itself comes from something else, but thanks to ockham's razor, we naturally assume that isn't the case.)
What supernatural realities could we be proceeding from? Some think it is a reality just like our own, that we are an ancestor simulation in an incredibly advanced computer and designer. However if the supernatural reality is just like our reality, and our reality is a simulation, then the reality we come from must also be a simulation. There is no reality like ours that isn't a simulation, so this causes a loop of simulations in simulations that can never end, so long as we assume the next proceeding reality will be like our own.
This however presents a problem of infinite regress. Pic related explains why this is logically impossible to work. An infinitely long chain of carts will not move unless the head has an engine. If you see the infinitely long chain moving, you know it's not all carts, that there is an engine somewhere moving it.
Likewise, an infinite regress of emerging simulations would never start in the first place without some fundamental, first, non-emergent reality as the head of the chain for everything to come from, and that can not be our reality, as our reality is emergent. Some people like to think we're a simulation, and the reality we come from is like ours back with Newtonian physics; you fool, Newtonian physics does not and never has existed - it has always been emergent from the "simulation". There is no fundamental Newtonian reality to emerge from.
Basically: God who exists beyond our reality, made this reality; it is his mind we emerge from.
Jack Cruz
I mean, I didn't explain why God is the better choice, but I will do that some other time.
Luis Adams
If god is defined as omnipotent and omnipresent, since creating a simulation makes you neither of those things, you do not become god. It doesn't matter that you're omnipotent in a very small portion of overall reality, since you are not omnipotent in your own reality you are not omnipotent at all and are therefore not god. In my first post, I differentiated between what you are calling a god and what god actually is. The checklist is easy, omnipotent and omnipresent. If something meets those two criteria, it is god. A creator of a simulation does not meet those criteria because the simulation exists inside of their base reality where they are not omnipotent or omnipresent, again this means that they are not omnipotent or omnipresent at all because those traits are not transitive, they do not transfer from the simulation. All it proves is that the simulation has a creator, or what the simulated beings could refer to as god, but it doesn't prove the existence of a god in base reality.
Zachary Bailey
>this retarded strawman is the best that religious people can come up with
This is why you’re a constant source of embarrassment to the right
Daniel Powell
T. Religious retard
In no way does it imply a god, you’re just desperate and as usual are reaching
Lincoln Reed
T. Religious retard embarrassing the right as usual
Zachary Martin
bare in mind that the definition of god being "omnipotent magic man in da sky" is relatively new. historically, god just meant powerful, and in popular culture most people would consider god to just mean creator.
>All it proves is that the simulation has a creator, or what the simulated beings could refer to as god,
Ok well that is what im saying
> but it doesn't prove the existence of a god in base reality.
perhaps there was never a base reality ? perhaps the simulations have been existing within each other for so long that it is impossible to even imagine there was once a beginning. perhaps you are right, and the first reality was created by some magical being beyond even the comprehension of a super A.I
>perhaps the real god is an A.I
James Russell
>reality was created: sim theory
>reality was created: islam
bottom line: you cannot be an atheist and believe in sim theory
definition of atheist: a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.