Why would there be a god?

A

apendrapew

Oral defecator
Registered Senior Member
There is a secret society of teletubbies living underground in the planet Pluto. That is a fact. I for one, however, believe that it's not true. It just doesn't make sense. Why would they live there? Why would they even exist?

Point:

I believe it's a false fact even though I can't prove it. Is this unreasonable?

I disbelieve in it on the grounds that it is an absurd, irrational and arbitrary notion. Just like God.
 
It is not absurd, irrational or arbitrary to be deist.

To be a deist is quite reasonable.

A little story of the future to help you understand:

In the future, computers and AI have improves so much that simulation of entire universes is possible, a complete simlulatino of earths history for example is possible. The big bang is simulated, evolution and all else. Now souls can be thus simulated. The souls in the simulatin now ask themselves, are there Gods? The answer is of course that the computer simulators (humans) are Gods to the simulated souls.

In the same waý this universe can be possible simulated. Gods to us would therefore be the computer simulators of our universe.

Did you get the point?
 
apendrapew. what is it about god that is absurd, irrational an arbitary?

you say the "notion of god" yes? but a "notion" is vague and therefore very accomodating of false attributes. a "notion" can become irrational absurd and arbitary quite easily. what is it that is really offensive about the god concept?
 
Streamline said:
Now souls can be thus simulated.
Click to expand...
why, why would you try to simulate non-existence, it would be a completely illogical process for a computer, what varibles could you imput, what is its role = it's does'nt really have any it 's the self, how does it effect reality= it has no effect, can you see it, touch it, smell it, etc=no error does not compute.thats all you'd get.
Streamline said:
The souls in the simulatin now ask themselves,
Click to expand...
they would'nt, as the would'nt exist, just as they dont in reality.
Streamline said:
are there Gods?
Click to expand...
however the little simulated creature/person would try to explain it's environment and probably come up with a god theory
Streamline said:
The answer is of course that the computer simulators (humans) are Gods to the simulated souls.
Click to expand...
no they wont think that unless the humans interact with them, but they still may come up with the god theory.
Streamline said:
In the same waý this universe can be possible simulated. Gods to us would therefore be the computer simulators of our universe.
Click to expand...
only if they interact with them, this is why we have a god theory without any basis in fact.
Streamline said:
Did you get the point?
Click to expand...
no, it's invalid.
 
mustafhakofi said:
why, why would you try to simulate non-existence, it would be a completely illogical process for a computer, what varibles could you imput, what is its role = it's does'nt really have any it 's the self, how does it effect reality= it has no effect, can you see it, touch it, smell it, etc=no error does not compute.thats all you'd get. they would'nt, as the would'nt exist, just as they dont in reality. however the little simulated creature/person would try to explain it's environment and probably come up with a god theoryno they wont think that unless the humans interact with them, but they still may come up with the god theory.only if they interact with them, this is why we have a god theory without any basis in fact.no, it's invalid.
Click to expand...

1. Souls are not non-existance
2. What? You are not very clear and not to the point.
3. The humans do not need to invervene for the simulated souls to come up with a God theory; infact they (the simulated souls) can themselves run a simulation or think of one if advanced enough and make the same argument that I make in this thread.
4. The scenario I described is a fact. From this fact one can deduce that there might exist Gods above us; though they appear stealthy to some.
 
mustafhakofi said:
why, why would you try to simulate non-existence, it would be a completely illogical process for a computer, what varibles could you imput, what is its role = it's does'nt really have any it 's the self, how does it effect reality= it has no effect, can you see it, touch it, smell it, etc=no error does not compute.thats all you'd get. they would'nt, as the would'nt exist, just as they dont in reality. however the little simulated creature/person would try to explain it's environment and probably come up with a god theoryno they wont think that unless the humans interact with them, but they still may come up with the god theory.only if they interact with them, this is why we have a god theory without any basis in fact.no, it's invalid.
Click to expand...
But if we simulated everything down to the last particle, even simulated yourself and everything else, wouldn't you be conscious in that simulation? Probably not, because you are more than numbers, and you are wrong about no soul, you still don't know anything. Reality is no simulation. Maths may very well explain much, make it easier to see how things interact etc. but it's not much more than that. Math doesn't make reality, thus the source of reality cannot be simulated using math. See what I mean?
 
Maths may very well explain much, make it easier to see how things interact etc. but it's not much more than that. Math doesn't make reality

Math helps to describe the physical laws that make up reality; how things interact with each other.
 
This discussion is not going where I wanted it to go.

Implicit in my original post is that God neither a good explanation for our universe, nor a necessary one. What I mean by the notion of God being an arbitrary one is that the notion of God arises out of an arbitrary system of patterns generated by our brains. Without these patterns, God wouldn't exist, because that's all God is: a concept.
 
exactly, apendrapew. god is just a concept and a pretty lame one at that.

and Streamline could you show one micro instance of a soul existing, please thank you.
and there are no facts in your scenario, it's pure fantasy, it's only what you would like it to be.
I would like to see you try, to substantiate any of your scenario as fact.
 
apendrapew said:
There is a secret society of teletubbies living underground in the planet Pluto. That is a fact. I for one, however, believe that it's not true. It just doesn't make sense. Why would they live there? Why would they even exist?

Point:

I believe it's a false fact even though I can't prove it. Is this unreasonable?

I disbelieve in it on the grounds that it is an absurd, irrational and arbitrary notion. Just like God.
Click to expand...

This is totally blasphemous. Everyone knows the universe was created by the FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER.
 
RAmen! Praise be to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and may His Noodly Appendage touch us all soon!
 
geeser said:
Streamline could you show one micro instance of a soul existing, please thank you.
and there are no facts in your scenario, it's pure fantasy, it's only what you would like it to be.
I would like to see you try, to substantiate any of your scenario as fact.
Click to expand...

What I mean with soul is what most non-religious people mean by soul, ie the immaterial soul that does the thinking, feeling things that humas do. It is this the simulation simulates.

The scenario is a fact in the imaginitative world. Just as 1+1=2 is a fact in the imaginitative world.
 
Streamline said:
What I mean with soul is what most non-religious people mean by soul, ie the immaterial soul that does the thinking, feeling things that humans do. It is this the simulation simulates.
Click to expand...
most non-religious people dont think the soul exist, and therefore does nothing, if it's immaterial, it can have no effect on anything, now can it, including thinking and feeling, they are chemical reactions and can be measured.

check out the thread "the soul" it's interesting reading.
 
audible said:
most non-religious people dont think the soul exist, and therefore does nothing, if it's immaterial, it can have no effect on anything, now can it, including thinking and feeling, they are chemical reactions and can be measured.

check out the thread "the soul" it's interesting reading.
Click to expand...

Ha ha. If it is immaterial it has no effect!

You do not know what you are talking about, pal. Software in your computer you're using to write the above, is immaterial. Are you seriously saying that that immaterial software has no effect in your computer.

Think again.
 
(Q) said:
Maths may very well explain much, make it easier to see how things interact etc. but it's not much more than that. Math doesn't make reality

Math helps to describe the physical laws that make up reality; how things interact with each other.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Is explaining existance the nature of existance? If you explain something in ridiculous detail, does that make it exist? What is it then? What is this that we see? I don't think it can be explained in words, not our words anyway.

For a long time I thought that it might be something dogmatic like "non-existance cannot exist therefor existance came"...like to fill the void :) Is that a illogical thought? I don't think so, I think it's rather logical.

Math is a great tool, just because it has rules to simplify, so that "1+1=2", "2" is just the simplified version of "1+1". Thus "1+1" is a relation of "2", so if we have the result we could get any relation by making it more complex, ok? But that's not doing any good unless we know the scale and actual relasionship something has, couldn't it therefor be said that we allready know what we put down to paper? Math is thus only a realisation of a idea.

I saw on the internet someone that thought that all mathematical equations held a universe. I don't buy into that idea. Cause I don't think something like math is the thing that makes something real.
 
streamline,

It is not absurd, irrational or arbitrary to be deist.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. To assert something is true without support is irrational. The only rational position regarding a deity is speculation. Credibility of such speculations is the next issue.
 
streamline said:
You do not know what you are talking about, pal. Software in your computer you're using to write the above, is immaterial. Are you seriously saying that that immaterial software has no effect in your computer.
Click to expand...
perhaps it just me, could you explain as you seem to be the intelligent one, how the information in my computer, is immaterial? thank you
as I can see it and it can be measured, it has body and form.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top