Religious concepts receive update via the Simulation Principle

[Ostronomos]

While many scientists witlessly deny the very implications of their theories, MIT professors embrace the new metaphysics - or, as one simulation paper  puts it, the "Matrix as Metaphysics" (assuming you've been following my most recent threads and their theoretical papers).

'The religions were trying to tell us that it's some kind of simulation, and that the soul is the player of the game,' Virk told the Daily Mail.

According to Virk, many of Christianity's core beliefs fit naturally within that framework. He believes the soul exists outside the simulated 

world as the true 'player,' while the human body functions as its avatar. 

In his view, the biblical Book of Life resembles a complete recording of every action taken inside the simulation, while the life review reported by many near-death experiencers mirrors replaying those recorded events after death.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle/othe...ddff&ei=13

[stryder]

While many scientists witlessly deny the very implications of their theories, MIT professors embrace the new metaphysics - or, as one simulation paper  puts it, the "Matrix as Metaphysics" (assuming you've been following my most recent threads and their theoretical papers).

'The religions were trying to tell us that it's some kind of simulation, and that the soul is the player of the game,' Virk told the Daily Mail.

According to Virk, many of Christianity's core beliefs fit naturally within that framework. He believes the soul exists outside the simulated 

world as the true 'player,' while the human body functions as its avatar. 

In his view, the biblical Book of Life resembles a complete recording of every action taken inside the simulation, while the life review reported by many near-death experiencers mirrors replaying those recorded events after death.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle/othe...ddff&ei=13

I'd suggest it's more likely that we live in the Real World.

While it's possible to virtualise layers that can be added to existence similar to ARG (Augmented Reality Game), that virtualised layer ends up folded back on the Real World where it gets flattened (Which is technically a Matrix) We'd end up with a Greater amount of Real versus the folded layers of Augmented as it would lead to stability. (Falling into a Droste Effect of virtual iterations would lead to chaos which would make it very difficult to maintain any stability.)

In other words it doesn't suggest anything about religion (other than it can be faked)

[Ostronomos]

While many scientists witlessly deny the very implications of their theories, MIT professors embrace the new metaphysics - or, as one simulation paper  puts it, the "Matrix as Metaphysics" (assuming you've been following my most recent threads and their theoretical papers).

'The religions were trying to tell us that it's some kind of simulation, and that the soul is the player of the game,' Virk told the Daily Mail.

According to Virk, many of Christianity's core beliefs fit naturally within that framework. He believes the soul exists outside the simulated 

world as the true 'player,' while the human body functions as its avatar. 

In his view, the biblical Book of Life resembles a complete recording of every action taken inside the simulation, while the life review reported by many near-death experiencers mirrors replaying those recorded events after death.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle/othe...ddff&ei=13

I'd suggest it's more likely that we live in the Real World. 

While it's possible to virtualise layers that can be added to existence similar to ARG (Augmented Reality Game), that virtualised layer ends up folded back on the Real World where it gets flattened (Which is technically a Matrix)  We'd end up with a Greater amount of Real versus the folded layers of Augmented as it would lead to stability.  (Falling into a Droste Effect of virtual iterations would lead to chaos which would make it very difficult to maintain any stability.)

In other words it doesn't suggest anything about religion (other than it can be faked)

There is no question that this world is a simulation created by a God. That would explain my supernatural experiences, which are more real than the mundane world. These experiences have left a lasting impression on me, and have lead me to conclude that consciousness or God is the one true reality.

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/7nr-KQhUids

[stryder]

While many scientists witlessly deny the very implications of their theories, MIT professors embrace the new metaphysics - or, as one simulation paper  puts it, the "Matrix as Metaphysics" (assuming you've been following my most recent threads and their theoretical papers).

'The religions were trying to tell us that it's some kind of simulation, and that the soul is the player of the game,' Virk told the Daily Mail.

According to Virk, many of Christianity's core beliefs fit naturally within that framework. He believes the soul exists outside the simulated 

world as the true 'player,' while the human body functions as its avatar. 

In his view, the biblical Book of Life resembles a complete recording of every action taken inside the simulation, while the life review reported by many near-death experiencers mirrors replaying those recorded events after death.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle/othe...ddff&ei=13

I'd suggest it's more likely that we live in the Real World. 

While it's possible to virtualise layers that can be added to existence similar to ARG (Augmented Reality Game), that virtualised layer ends up folded back on the Real World where it gets flattened (Which is technically a Matrix)  We'd end up with a Greater amount of Real versus the folded layers of Augmented as it would lead to stability.  (Falling into a Droste Effect of virtual iterations would lead to chaos which would make it very difficult to maintain any stability.)

In other words it doesn't suggest anything about religion (other than it can be faked)

There is no question that this world is a simulation created by a God. That would explain my supernatural experiences, which are more real than the mundane world. These experiences have left a lasting impression on me, and have lead me to conclude that consciousness or God is the one true reality.

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/7nr-KQhUids

What would your God run the simulation on? What's the ratio of virtualised to actual? For instance if an atom is virtualised, what is it's actual ratio equivalence?

Is your god just a programmer? (Who made the architecture that the program runs on?)

As you can see, we end up with a bunch of questions, and those questions would require even more elaborate answers. If we consider Ockham's Razor as being a rule of thumb where we try to keep things simplified for the purpose of not over complexing to the point of making something impossible, Then the outcome really is that we are not in a simulation. The world is vastly complex with unnecessary elements that in all purposes would be cut from a simulation as being "unimportant" or "too mundane".

It doesn't mean that we can use simulations or be impart augmented, it's just we are not running on some mystical non-existent computer somewhere in a deities "Godcave" (instead of mancave)

[C C]

There is no question that this world is a simulation created by a God. That would explain my supernatural experiences...

There are problems with "simulation". It implies that the referenced reality is just an imitation or counterfeit of some other world. And the contemporary mindset almost always construes it as being implemented by technology. Both of those conflict with the classic idea of God. In that a spiritual or immaterial realm is surely radically different from a natural or physical one (i.e., our universe isn't a mimicking of it), and the idea of a traditional deity being dependent upon technology is likewise incompatible for the same reason.

Of course, it's a different matter if one is willing to accept that "god" is actually just some shmuck in an advanced future running a history model project. Or that god is a galaxy-spanning archailect network that likes to generate simulations for recreational purposes. Both of those are "natural in origin" gods that would have arisen incrementally in antecedent realms that operate akin to this one. But their artificial worlds are just internally convincing superficial props, like extremely well-regulated dreams.

So ancient Eastern mysticism (Maya and so-forth) -- and their non-technological placeholders for whatever prior-in-rank level that makes this one possible -- seem to better accommodate vintage gods.

Granted, though, a simulation or Matrix viewpoint is grounded in something that might actually be possible someday and thereby the only route that could ever explain how physical-law-defying "miracles" could be possible for a skeptical, secular audience. But at best it's just a temporary resting place before jumping off to the "I know not what" alternative that doesn't require an origin for itself. As Stryder noted with the Droste effect, it can't be a causal hierarchy of turtles all the way down or up.

At some point (better sooner than later) that has to end with a fundamentally different ontology that does not require nature-dependent machine systems for producing its oneirocosms (dream worlds). All "simulation" can ever be is just a dangling carrot to lure scientism folk into a tunnel that leads to a lot more crazy, noumenal place. (That still doesn't necessarily entail anything like a classic God or a personified source for it all.)

[Syne]

There are problems with "simulation". It implies that the referenced reality is just an imitation or counterfeit of some other world. And the contemporary mindset almost always construes it as being implemented by technology. Both of those conflict with the classic idea of God. In that a spiritual or immaterial realm is surely radically different from a natural or physical one (i.e., our universe isn't a mimicking of it), and the idea of a traditional deity being dependent upon technology is likewise incompatible for the same reason.

The best fit with a Western conception of God would be one in which reality is a simulation to God (within God's mind so to say) but a reality for all those contingent beings within it. It's not a simulation "of" anything but a simulation "for" the benefit of its inhabitants.

[Ostronomos]

There is no question that this world is a simulation created by a God. That would explain my supernatural experiences...

There are problems with "simulation". It implies that the referenced reality is just an imitation or counterfeit of some other world. And the contemporary mindset almost always construes it as being implemented by technology. Both of those conflict with the classic idea of God. In that a spiritual or immaterial realm is surely radically different from a natural or physical one (i.e., our universe isn't a mimicking of it), and the idea of a traditional deity being dependent upon technology is likewise incompatible for the same reason.

Of course, it's a different matter if one is willing to accept that "god" is actually just some shmuck in an advanced future running a history model project. Or that god is a galaxy-spanning archailect network that likes to generate simulations for recreational purposes. Both of those are "natural in origin" gods that would have arisen incrementally in antecedent realms that operate akin to this one. But their artificial worlds are just internally convincing superficial props, like extremely well-regulated dreams.

So ancient Eastern mysticism (Maya and so-forth) -- and their non-technological placeholders for whatever prior-in-rank level that makes this one possible -- seem to better accommodate vintage gods.

Granted, though, a simulation or Matrix viewpoint is grounded in something that might actually be possible someday and thereby the only route that could ever explain how physical-law-defying "miracles" could be possible for a skeptical, secular audience. But at best it's just a temporary resting place before jumping off to the "I know not what" alternative that doesn't require an origin for itself. As Stryder noted with the Droste effect, it can't be a causal hierarchy of turtles all the way down or up.

At some point (better sooner than later) that has to end with a fundamentally different ontology that does not require nature-dependent machine systems for producing its oneirocosms (dream worlds). All "simulation" can ever be is just a dangling carrot to lure scientism folk into a tunnel that leads to a lot more crazy, noumenal place. (That still doesn't necessarily entail anything like a classic God or a personified source for it all.)

You raise an interesting point with the dream analogy and the potential challenges we face with the simulation principle.

The reason I accept the idea of the simulation hypothesis is because it explains the supernatural. Not only that but it does away with materialism (the only alternative to God), which I've proven false. Alas, the simulation principle requires testing to elevate it to the status of scientific theory. 

Your second-to-last paragraph highlights its appeal. With advances in technology, this simulation principle is an inevitability it seems. Given the fact that the universe is finite (due to the stripping away of space and time and object), the simulation principle is the only logical conclusion it seems.

---

While many scientists witlessly deny the very implications of their theories, MIT professors embrace the new metaphysics - or, as one simulation paper  puts it, the "Matrix as Metaphysics" (assuming you've been following my most recent threads and their theoretical papers).

'The religions were trying to tell us that it's some kind of simulation, and that the soul is the player of the game,' Virk told the Daily Mail.

According to Virk, many of Christianity's core beliefs fit naturally within that framework. He believes the soul exists outside the simulated 

world as the true 'player,' while the human body functions as its avatar. 

In his view, the biblical Book of Life resembles a complete recording of every action taken inside the simulation, while the life review reported by many near-death experiencers mirrors replaying those recorded events after death.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle/othe...ddff&ei=13

I'd suggest it's more likely that we live in the Real World. 

While it's possible to virtualise layers that can be added to existence similar to ARG (Augmented Reality Game), that virtualised layer ends up folded back on the Real World where it gets flattened (Which is technically a Matrix)  We'd end up with a Greater amount of Real versus the folded layers of Augmented as it would lead to stability.  (Falling into a Droste Effect of virtual iterations would lead to chaos which would make it very difficult to maintain any stability.)

In other words it doesn't suggest anything about religion (other than it can be faked)

There is no question that this world is a simulation created by a God. That would explain my supernatural experiences, which are more real than the mundane world. These experiences have left a lasting impression on me, and have lead me to conclude that consciousness or God is the one true reality.

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/7nr-KQhUids

What would your God run the simulation on?  What's the ratio of virtualised to actual?  For instance if an atom is virtualised, what is it's actual ratio equivalence?

Is your god just a programmer? (Who made the architecture that the program runs on?)

As you can see, we end up with a bunch of questions, and those questions would require even more elaborate answers.  If we consider Ockham's Razor as being a rule of thumb where we try to keep things simplified for the purpose of not over complexing to the point of making something impossible, Then the outcome really is that we are not in a simulation.  The world is vastly complex with unnecessary elements that in all purposes would be cut from a simulation as being "unimportant" or "too mundane". 

It doesn't mean that we can use simulations or be impart augmented, it's just we are not running on some mystical non-existent computer somewhere in a deities "Godcave" (instead of mancave)

Why do atheists use the term "your God" as though it were not their God as well?