On many a great question of humanity sometimes suggested answers that sound first to spectacular new knowledge, but basically contribute nothing to answer the question. An example from the natural sciences could be the panspermia. This hypothesis answers the question of where and how life arose on Earth so that life came to one or the other way from space to Earth. Such a proposal seems to stimulate the human imagination much, for this hypothesis finds time to time mention. She moves the question of how life originated on Earth, only then, as life anywhere else was (and how exactly it could come here). And there are no references to the observation of extraterrestrial origin of life, it stays in the panspermia in a nice, but useless intellectual gimmick.
is naturally much worse the situation when one moves from the science rather philosophic hypotheses. Such a hypothesis is that of the "simulated reality". Here the question of the true nature and purpose of life is answered in the statement that the world and we were all just a "computer simulation" of another advanced civilization. That may be, but it may be just as well that we're all just characters in the dream of a sky-blue giraffe. Interestingly, but will include a Philosphieprofessor Nick Bostrom , the first hypothesis quite debatable, but those of the giraffe probably not. And that gives a clue to the significance of "simulated reality". For while a representative of a culture in which dreams and giraffes play a role, probably the speculation about the dream of the giraffe considered worthwhile to find a representative of a culture in which computers and computer simulations play a major role, the hypothesis of the computer-simulated reality interesting. When one thinks here once more, then let the central arguments against the atheists have been right the religions, also oppose the hypothesis of the simulated reality. If the religious image of God accused of just an "extrapolation" to be more human interests and abilities, so this is more evident for the "simulated reality". In religion, the human power to the omnipotence of a hypothetical deity is expanded. In the "simulated reality" of the modern human ability for the computer simulation for unlimited simulation capability of a hypothetical civilization is removed. While religion assumes that the fictional deity of course has an interest in humanity and its problems, it is exactly the same thing invented for the higher civilization the "simulated reality". Values and knowledge of religion and the "simulated reality" and both are rather superficial. For the chain of asking for the "why", the religion with a "God wills it nunmal so" stop that "simulated reality" can end up with a "so nunmal the simulation further inquiries.
We see as fast, where the hypothesis of the simulated reality belongs: to inner world and the metaphysical theory solipsism in the store room nice but useless gadgets, and even there calmly in the back shelf. That would be it. If not my favorite reason simulation on the Web, Enlightenment 2.0 (unfortunately, it deals almost exclusively with political propaganda, and hardly with pseudo philosophy ...) wanted to sell , just the "simulated reality" as best argument for the existence of God . And once again presented an atheist in a purely religious in nature as a rational argument. But wanted to point out that one could be sure that once the relexartige "Once again the nonsense of atheism as a religion!" trigger. Hopeless. But in the end no one can even exclude a bug in the current reality simulation!
0 comments:
Post a Comment