• ExLisper@linux.community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The “belief” we’re in a simulation is more like a interesting idea than something people organize their lives around. Is it possible? Yes. Am I going to praise the great programmer every Sunday? No.

    The belief in God in most cases is not just belief in some general higher power but a very specific deity with weird morality, silly mythology and bunch of scam artists behind it.

    • I think there’s a higher power…
    • Ok…
    • that got mad at us for eating fruits but then impregnated a lady with itself and pissed us off so that we murdered him and he could say he’s not mad anymore.
    • … WTF?
    • swim@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      I more or less agree, but you keep using “believe” when you ought to use “belief.” Just FYI.

            • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              English is an endless deluge of that experience, because our orthography is bullshit. People have tried to fix it. Their clever rules were partly adopted and became even more exceptions and special cases.

              • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                Yep.

                I just learned of the Shavian Alphabet yesterday. It’s designed specifically for English and fits it well, except the sounds in it are so specific that when you write in it, you have to write in a specific regional accent. Fortunately it can’t become a new set of special cases because it’s an entirely new script not related to Latin.

    • RIPandTERROR@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Could an all powerful, loving God be real? Sure. Why not?

      Could a powerful, all loving God be real? Yeah, seems realistic. In many ways, I am a God to an ant.

      Could an all powerful all loving God be real?

      Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha no.

      God is either inept, indifferent, or a straight up ass. None of those items are something I care to worship, even at the threat of the eternal damnation.

    • LifeBandit666@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      By their own book, the bad guy thought the stupid naked people should have a bit of an education and the good guy punished them for trying to improve their knowledge base. Serpents rule!

      I was taught in school that the real battle in the universe is between chaos and order. They gave it a fancy name, Entropy, but that was the gist.

      So Chaos is God and Order is Satan. Live all hunter gathering under God or just go to the Supermarket under Satan, and spend the rest of your time doing other things, like making art or scientific theories.

      Even now the Church is against progress. Don’t let them Gays get married for fucks sake, the world will explode.

      Hail Satan.

    • PilferJynx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      God is a programmer. That explains a lot actually. I guess he’s still working out the bugs (features)

    • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      This argument conflates belief with religious practice. The core similarity of both beliefs is that the universe is intelligently designed. And you can believe in the idea of a God without participating in any kind of formal religious practice. That “most” religious belief is wrapped up in a particular religious tradition is ancillary.

      • royalbarnacle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Religion’s weakest argument is the claim that the world was intelligently designed. When it so clearly isn’t.

        Simulation theory doesn’t claim someone designed all this. They built a simulator where all this evolution and history happened, like emergent gameplay on steroids. It’s not the same kind of “design” we’re talking about.

        • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Intelligent design is a broad, vague, and intensely mutable concept. It isn’t helped by the fact that there’s multiple kinds, with the pseudoscientific kind touted by the religious right in America and the more generic, very fucking old “teleological argument” which is also intelligent design at its core. To give a specific example of intelligent design philosophy that isn’t directly tied to a belief in a deity as an active participant, you can look at the deists, who believed that the universe’s fundamental laws were engineered by a kind of “clock maker” deity who left the universe running under its own principles but doesn’t have a direct, guiding hand in individual events. This is still a form of “intelligent design” and closely corresponds to simulation theory. At this point, you are redefining terms to suite your argument. Also, you can’t really say the world is or is not intelligently designed, as you have no evidence for either. The only truly “logical” position to hold for any of this is straight agnosticism.