On Feb 20, 6:37 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 10:32 am, acw <a...@lavabit.com> wrote:
>
> > On 2/20/2012 13:45, Craig Weinberg wrote:> On Feb 19, 11:57 pm, 
> > 1Z<peterdjo...@yahoo.com>  wrote:
> > >> On Feb 20, 4:41 am, Craig Weinberg<whatsons...@gmail.com>  wrote:
> > ..
> > >> Believable falsehoods are falsehoods and convincing illusions
> > >> still aren't reality
>
> > > It doesn't matter if they believe in the simulation or not, the belief
> > > itself is only possible because of the particular reality generated by
> > > the program. Comp precludes the possibility of contacting any truer
> > > reality than the simulation.
>
> > If those observers are generally intelligent and capable of
> > Turing-equivalent computation, they might theorize about many things,
> > true or not. Just like we do, and just like we can't know if we're right.
>
> Right, but true = a true reflection of the simulation.

No. True = true of unsimulated reality.

> If I make a
> simulation where I regularly stop the program and make miraculous
> changes, then the most intelligent observers might rightly conclude
> that there is an omnipotent entity

They can only wrongly conclude that since you are not omnipotent.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to