Jarhyn
Wizard
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2010
- Messages
- 14,524
- Gender
- Androgyne; they/them
- Basic Beliefs
- Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I gotta agree with fromderinside. Mathematics is only a tool that we invented that we use to understand those patterns. Its like we use a meter stick to understand the dimensions of an object but that does not mean that the object is made of meter sticks, or that it wouldn't exist if we had not thought up the idea of a meter as a standard of measurement.
You say that, but then I can point to an entire universe defined and designed and implemented by a mathematical algorithm, whose existence can be expressed by a single, albeit very large, number.
A universe can exist as and be expressed by a mathematical structure.
The biggest problem "argument from simulation" creates is that it still offers no useful argument to inform philosophy, ethics, or morality.
Of you want to point at simulation as being proof of a God, I can just point to a simulation that I created and both god of, and am a complete piece of shit to at the same time, and I can equally point to the fact that if I could have made a more high-fi simulation with more "real", less abstracted people in it, I probably would have.
We are obviously using very definitions for; universe, real, structure, etc.... So we aren't actually having a discussion. We are each talking about very different things.
We are in a thread talking about arguments that God exists on the basis of the universe being simulated. To then ignore something because you want to play No-True-Scotsman games is asinine.