This book says that if we live in a virtual reality, a simulation, the objects we touch etc are real for they are digital objects. In fact there should be more mention of how every thing is really nearly all empty space rather than a thing so if we are not in a simulation we are almost in one.
The Bible definitely sees all things as very concrete. You even have the story of God separating light from darkness and doing all those other things in Genesis. He goes as far as to put a vault in to make sure the water on earth separates from that in the sky. To stress how different humanity was from animal and fish, he even orders that man must rule what is on the earth and in the sea and in the sky.
Chalmers points to Popper who said that a hypothesis is not scientific unless the evidence could show that it is false. Anything that is untestable then is not science. Against Popper it is pointed out there are scientific theories that have weight but cannot be falsified. “Whether testable or not, the simulation hypothesis is a perfectly meaningful hypothesis about our world.”
There is a difference between something being untestable for it is not around any more and in something that is and could perform in tests such as God.
Interestingly, a simulation hypothesis does not tell us much. Perhaps an unimaginably powerful angel controls all and he thinks he is God and simulates a universe and doesn’t know he is simulating it. And within that there could be aliens unimaginably bigger and more powerful than us and with computers we cannot even visualise that are able to do simulations too. There could be countless simulations within simulations. We could be simulations several times over. I would point out that our idea of scale is wrong. We can't imagine any living being greater than a dinosaur. There could be life out there that is so different and maybe even a galaxy size. If there are different universes, we can't assume that they are not too different from ours. Just because ours is such a scale does not mean others have to be.
Even if reality is reality, our religious notions and experiences could be down to a simulation. I'm saying there could be part reality and part simulation happening.
I would point out that religion typically has some person being chosen to receive revelation from God to pass it on to others. What if he told Moses or Jesus or Muhammad that it was all a simulation? Or settled for saying, "It might be and it might not be." That would make it 50/50. We can't prove that he didn't tell them that for even the Bible does not claim to record all God revealed. We have zero right to assume that God will not say it is a simulation tomorrow and say that he had reasons for not saying it sooner or that it was not relevant enough. The point is that God belief does nothing to dodge the suspicion of a simulation. It in fact is only a split-hair away from supporting it. The book says we cannot know that we are not in a simulation. Surely a God could find a way if he is almighty to help us know better if we are not in a simulation? Why not? He has done nothing to at least make it very implausible.
It is contended that the universe is fine-tuned for producing life. A simulated fine-tuning would be more reasonable than an actual one. Who knows?
Helpfully the book points out that “Ockham’s Razor says: Do not multiply entities without necessity! This says that, other things being equal, we should favour the most parsimonious theory – the theory that postulates the fewest things. You should accept a complex theory only when there’s no similar one consistent with the data.” He points out that the multiverse theory tries to explain how the universe is fine-tuned for life. He warns that a new problem arises, the fine-tuning of the multiverse. But if we are in a simulation, fine-tuning might not be real.
It is a fact that nearly all our information comes from memory. You only remember the last time you remembered an event. Memories add in things that never happened. They delete things that did. They downplay things that were certain. So we already have a simulation in that sense.
He gives an example of the extended mind hypothesis, “If someone steals my smartphone, we typically think of this as theft. But if the extended-mind hypothesis is right, it’s more akin to assault. If the phone is part of me, then interfering with the phone is interfering with my person. This trend is likely to increase as our reliance on augmented technology grows.”
We know how people get cross and vicious when they are corrected on some misdemeanour. Their mistakes or "sins" are like the smartphone. The extended mind hypotheses does apply to our deeds - you are an agent and you act. And if it shouldn’t the fact remains that we are hard-wired to force the connection. If your phone or whatever is not you, fine. What matters is that you treat it as part of you and your identity. Many people would rather be punched in the eye than have their phone stolen.
The extended mind kind of behaviour applies when people start to see their sense that there is a higher power, their idols and temples as somehow being extensions of themselves, giving them presence here and there. Religion may be motivated by a wish to feel bigger and stronger by creating these remote arms and legs and brains. By commanding you to observe sabbaths and feasts and to pray often it is trying to turn itself into an extension of who you are. As you are so close to your spouse and children you end up trying to get yourself to rub off on you so that you become somehow part of them, their arm. That explains why there is so much rage in a parent if a child or spouse falls away from the religion internalised by the parent.
The consequences of the extended mind behaviours can be dire. It happens to the most secular of us. If we can do that with our physical brain, imagine what happens if we think our mind is some kind of soul that transcends or is bigger than us! It is going to increase the problems. Extended soul theory is a topic for the thinker.
We find that Reality puts some amazing ideas out there and overthrows many - especially religious - certainties. A bit more teasing out of concepts though might be recommended.
posted Amazon 17 November 2024