On 16 Feb 2015, at 02:55, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Interesting John. In steinharts view the first initiator of reality
may indeed not have been a super mind, except in power. Kind of like
gnosticism, maybe.
2+2=4 is enough. No need to add unnecessary metaphysics. This is not
controversial, although not well known by philosophers, logicians know
this since Gödel, Kleene, etc.
What is not trivial is that it leads to "new equation" for fundamental
physics (given by the FPI, translated in the intensional variant of
self-reference, making comp testable in some sense).
The succeeding universes and each cosm has a god will be
succeedingly better.
But this does not make sense. Universe are not things which exists
ontologically.
People get moved to better universes after croaking, akin to
processes getting pipelined as with software engineering. We would
be one on a gigantic processes, aka programs, aka cellular automata,
that are copied and then initiated later. As with Bostrom, steinhart
says that these programs, us, eventually begin their own sim
creations. I got this from steinharts other papers I have been
studying. So your critique of steinharts 1st mind or god, would not
find opposition with him, but it would suggest that evolution (to
me) must be a primary program. Thanks for your coment.
Once you bet on programs (computationalism) you belongs to infinities
of computations, and the appearance of the universe emerges from a
statistics on all computations. Bostrom participated to this list but
seems to not have yet taken into account the first person
indeterminacy (FPI). He and others told me at some meeting that this
what sort of taboo. A part of his argument can still be saved, as
indeed comp implies that we can test [Computationalism OR we are in a
purposeful simulation, with entities which consume an infinite amount
of energy to lie to us, as they must change our minds each time we
look at the details of the simulation].
Bruno
Mitch
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
-----Original Message-----
From: John Clark <[email protected]>
To: everything-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, Feb 15, 2015 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From
quantum theory to dialectics?
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 12:52 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List <[email protected]
> wrote:
> John, see if you can read this paper. Its a slideshow from Ars
Disputandi of an eric steinhart paper, on the theological
implications of the simulation argument. This is the only copy I
downloaded of the url, but I was able to do a download and print at
work so I have hard copy. Steinhart seems to be an atheist, but
believes there was a creator and now a system of creators above and
beyond us, etc. I guess steinhart might say, yeah thers a god, but
don't pray to him. If you can read this, please give out with the
feedback. I am feeling the dude may be spot on, etc. But I will
guess that you will not see it this way. Which is good with me.
http://www.slideshare.net/mobile/UnitB166ER/theological-implications-of-the-simulation-argument-by-eric-steinhart
Even if we are living in one of a infinite number of recursive
simulations it doesn't necessarily imply that the guy who's
simulating us must be smarter than we are, and it would be a pretty
poor sort of God if we're smarter than He is. A simulated hurricane
is smarter at predicting what a real hurricane will do than the
meteorologist who created the simulation, and a simulated Chess
grandmaster is smarter at Chess than the real Chess grandmaster who
wrote the Chess program. And even if the simulation argument is true
(and the restriction on the number of calculations that can be
performed in the observable universe may rule out infinite levels,
unless that restriction was just tacked on by our simulators) you
wouldn't have all the knowledge that the infinite number of
simulations below you have. Steinhart also seems to assume that
every event have a cause, but I know of no law of logic that demands
that.
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
