If the universe that we inhabit were a practical experiment undertaken by some macrocosmic lifeform (or AI), would the religious (Christians, let's say) have cause for 'I told you so'? Is that effectively what God is? Or do you think that the 'intent' of a creator is more important to the believer than the creation itself in the bestowal of the name God? Could a natural creator (as opposed to supernatural) be accepted as God?
Praps I'm asking the wrong people, but just wondered...
To me personally, no. God as a being implies supernatural, which a known AI creator is not.
A computer programmer smart enough to create this universe would be indistinguishable from what humans have known as "God". The term "supernatural" is just a place holder for things beyond our capacity to observe. We would not be able to observe the programmer. It's difficult to say that this universe is not a simulation - it has many characteristics of such. If it is a simulation, then the ID guys are correct, at least on one level. The debate rages.
Another point: if we are a simulation, the programmer could have easily programmed Jesus to appear again after his death, or any other miracle reported by any religion. It would be no different than an enemy suddenly appearing on a video game.
Having the apparent powers of a god does not constitute God. I recon any Christian would not be comfortable calling the man-in-the-sky God unless the intent were there - loving and stuff (whatever mysterious ways were worked)
I'd certainly prefer to imagine myself part of the simulation/experiement universe than the vanity project of an isolated deity, which by comparison feels somewhat empty.
Quote from: Siz on April 23, 2016, 11:13:28 PM
If the universe that we inhabit were a practical experiment undertaken by some macrocosmic lifeform (or AI), would the religious (Christians, let's say) have cause for 'I told you so'? Is that effectively what God is? Or do you think that the 'intent' of a creator is more important to the believer than the creation itself in the bestowal of the name God? Could a natural creator (as opposed to supernatural) be accepted as God?
Praps I'm asking the wrong people, but just wondered...
Well it certainly would be possible. Just look at No Mans Sky (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQhSP82uhY4) and that is a piece of light entertainment initially create by three people and features 18,446,744,073,709,551,61 planets, each with their own unique eco systems, scale it up to something more physics based that isn't running on a computer you can buy for less than £300 and you could really push the boundaries.
If you are going to create a simulation a lot of the systems we see don't really make sense unless what we see is a by product of something else entirely. Because you don't need overly complicated systems to create replicating beings that change with each generation, or sources of energy, or waste, or organs, in fact you can get anything to do anything. If the point of the system is to create life then it is a very round about way of doing it.
Also the creator if creating something that was self producing, i.e. it was automated rather than each part being crafted that creator most likely would have no idea what the majority of the universe they created looked like. If you took our universe and looked at the amount of planets there are estimated to be around 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 and you spent a single second looking at each planet it would take 31,709,791,983,764,584 years to view them all, considering the universe changes with time it would be pretty much impossible for any creator to have any idea what was going on beyond either a micro scale of a single point at the time they were looking or macro scale viewing the whole things. Beyond being able to say look we said it was created by something they don't really have any grounds to stand on.
But if it's a simulation then who created the programmers? If you're saying they are 'natural' as opposed to 'supernatural' the only way they could have come into being is through some form of evolution so you're negating the need for any god.
Quote from: Crow on April 24, 2016, 01:38:45 PM
Quote from: Siz on April 23, 2016, 11:13:28 PM
If the universe that we inhabit were a practical experiment undertaken by some macrocosmic lifeform (or AI), would the religious (Christians, let's say) have cause for 'I told you so'? Is that effectively what God is? Or do you think that the 'intent' of a creator is more important to the believer than the creation itself in the bestowal of the name God? Could a natural creator (as opposed to supernatural) be accepted as God?
Praps I'm asking the wrong people, but just wondered...
Well it certainly would be possible. Just look at No Mans Sky (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQhSP82uhY4) and that is a piece of light entertainment initially create by three people and features 18,446,744,073,709,551,61 planets, each with their own unique eco systems, scale it up to something more physics based that isn't running on a computer you can buy for less than £300 and you could really push the boundaries.
If you are going to create a simulation a lot of the systems we see don't really make sense unless what we see is a by product of something else entirely. Because you don't need overly complicated systems to create replicating beings that change with each generation, or sources of energy, or waste, or organs, in fact you can get anything to do anything. If the point of the system is to create life then it is a very round about way of doing it.
Also the creator if creating something that was self producing, i.e. it was automated rather than each part being crafted that creator most likely would have no idea what the majority of the universe they created looked like. If you took our universe and looked at the amount of planets there are estimated to be around 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 and you spent a single second looking at each planet it would take 31,709,791,983,764,584 years to view them all, considering the universe changes with time it would be pretty much impossible for any creator to have any idea what was going on beyond either a micro scale of a single point at the time they were looking or macro scale viewing the whole things. Beyond being able to say look we said it was created by something they don't really have any grounds to stand on.
In human terms, yes, pretty much impossible. But we wouldn't be talking in human terms would we?!
Quote from: Claireliontamer on April 24, 2016, 02:39:42 PM
But if it's a simulation then who created the programmers? If you're saying they are 'natural' as opposed to 'supernatural' the only way they could have come into being is through some form of evolution so you're negating the need for any god.
(https://m.popkey.co/7ce19e/zaV5Z.gif)
I don't think that Xians would have cause to say "I told you so" as their god has a specific personality (ok, that's debatable, more like personalities) which Xtians claim to know. What if the programmers are wholly different "people"?
I don't know if the perceived intent of their creator is more important to the believer than having (in their minds) satisfactory answers to whatever god-of-the-gaps question. In most cases, the mind abhors not knowing stuff and gods are convenient fill ins for questions to which they don't know the answer, that way they have some feeling of control over what they in fact have no control over.
I guess it depends on whether believers draw a line between "creator" and "god". A macrocosmic being that created this universe would certainly be their creator, but maybe not their god.
The whole thing could get very weird. :mysterious:
Quote from: Siz on April 24, 2016, 03:30:37 PM
In human terms, yes, pretty much impossible. But we wouldn't be talking in human terms would we?!
Depends. Seeing as a bunch of twenty year old programmers can put something together like that it doesn't exactly need anything extraordinary. They have a program that lets them view all possible permutation and look at lots of data it would still take an insane amount of time to view it all. Even a super computer that can analyse everything at ridiculous speeds it is still going to take a while but what information is that super/quantum computer actually gathering. Especially when we consider the wide variety of scales at play, we see things through our human lens as that is the only thing we can view it from but like a scientist running experiments trying to find traces of anti matter the rest of the stuff is pretty much junk data unless something interesting pops up. Who is to say we are not just junk data and not all that interesting.
Quote from: Siz on April 23, 2016, 11:13:28 PMwould the religious (Christians, let's say) have cause for 'I told you so'?
Depends how they were programmed
Quote from: Siz on April 24, 2016, 03:38:04 PM
Quote from: Claireliontamer on April 24, 2016, 02:39:42 PM
But if it's a simulation then who created the programmers? If you're saying they are 'natural' as opposed to 'supernatural' the only way they could have come into being is through some form of evolution so you're negating the need for any god.
(https://m.popkey.co/7ce19e/zaV5Z.gif)
Hmmm maybe I have missed the point.....
Quote from: Siz on April 24, 2016, 08:38:02 AM
Having the apparent powers of a god does not constitute God. I recon any Christian would not be comfortable calling the man-in-the-sky God unless the intent were there - loving and stuff (whatever mysterious ways were worked)
I'd certainly prefer to imagine myself part of the simulation/experiement universe than the vanity project of an isolated deity, which by comparison feels somewhat empty.
But all believers claim to know about God comes through revelation, not scientific knowledge. All we could ever know about such a God is what he/she chose to reveal. Anything else would be outside our capacity to observe. So we would not be able to distinguish between a supernatural God and a super intelligent programmer. If the programmer revealed himself in some way as being loving, that's how we would perceive him, even if he wasn't. So our relationship even with a programmer would have to be based on faith that we are understanding him correctly. I don't think we could know the difference between a God in the traditional sense and a super intelligent programmer. But in either case, the ID folks would be correct - the universe is the product - ultimately - of intelligent design.
Quote from: Bad Penny II on April 24, 2016, 04:32:49 PM
Quote from: Siz on April 23, 2016, 11:13:28 PMwould the religious (Christians, let's say) have cause for 'I told you so'?
Depends how they were programmed
They're just Christians, 'kay?! With tambourines and potting sheds and wearing their wife's knickers... Christians!
Quote from: Siz on April 24, 2016, 05:24:25 PM
Quote from: Bad Penny II on April 24, 2016, 04:32:49 PM
Quote from: Siz on April 23, 2016, 11:13:28 PMwould the religious (Christians, let's say) have cause for 'I told you so'?
Depends how they were programmed
They're just Christians, 'kay?! With tambourines and potting sheds and wearing their wife's knickers... Christians!
OK, it'll all depend of the quality of the deities simulated hat, might be shoes for some, robes, commanding voice.
If the simulation has been run and all the pieces are left a moment to reflect, the christaian components probably will be jolly and self congratulatory, it's in their nature. I be might be bighting as many of their faces as I can for old times sake but it's probably not worth the effort, it's last chance though.
Quote from: Siz on April 23, 2016, 11:13:28 PM
If the universe that we inhabit were a practical experiment undertaken by some macrocosmic lifeform (or AI), would the religious (Christians, let's say) have cause for 'I told you so'? Is that effectively what God is? Or do you think that the 'intent' of a creator is more important to the believer than the creation itself in the bestowal of the name God? Could a natural creator (as opposed to supernatural) be accepted as God?
Praps I'm asking the wrong people, but just wondered...
I think that for a justified "I told you so" it would require more reliable evidence than guessing (much, much better than guesses made by bronze age goat herders). Also, for Christians to have any "I told you so" weight, the "god" thing would need to be as they described it to be, otherwise deists would have a better "I told you so" than Christians. Otherwise atheists who say, "something started the universe as we know it, we just don't yet know that that thing is or if that thing is sentient." would have an equal (I think better), "I told you so."