My brain gets bent trying to absorb the various pixelated, multidimensional matrix universe theories. Personally, dark matter and dark energy look like evidence of the spirit world to me. That's where Grandma's ghost really resides.
Bullsh*t, I know, but, when you can't understand it all, credit God and blame the devil.
This has been a well-considered overview, and it made me increasingly tense with anticipation of the conclusion.
Then came the conclusion: and my reading it was accompanied by a sigh of relief.
Here are my tentative, sketchy remarks as to why:
Two months ago, obituaries appeared of the outstanding philosopher and physicist Wolfgang Smith who in his writings addressed the enigma that either rivals or absorbs the enigma of paranormal phenomena, of quantum phenomena, and offered a solution based on a worldview shared by all the major ancient worldviews that have existed through most of human history, and a number of them continue to this day. This is a worldview that that makes a distinction between three domains of the cosmos. And it is one that, rather than standing in quiet support of the Kantian separation between the phenomenal and the noumenal, it stands to it in conflict.
In Wolfgang Smith's 2018 interview known as "The Principle" interview, Smith is explicit in his condemnation of the Kantian approach as having ushered into, or at least marked the beginning of two centuries of barren, lifeless philosophising, one disconnected from the lived experiences of ordinary people.
That last point strikes me as 'self-evident.'
Further and slightly more detailed criticism of Kant can be learned on Smith's website, in this article by another prominent philosopher: https://philos-sophia.org/unmasking-ai/
And this is where my remarks start to earn their description of "tentative" and "sketchy." My breadth of reading in philosophy and its history likely surpass that of the average Joe... but not by much!
Having said that, all of the aforesaid is just the weakest and most superficial part of my reasons for dismissing your uncomfortable conclusion. For many years already, the idea that our reality may be an illusion, a simulation akin to a video game, had already struck me as deserving of the waste basket. ... You'll excuse me for being at a loss for words as to why. All deep reasons are hard to put into words, especially if one hasn't tried it before. Just let me do my momentary best:
* An illusion? Even illusions are a part of reality. You may dislike the illusion's fragmentary participation in the reality, but does it make it any less a part of all that exists?
That you are vastly imperfect, does not make your sense of reality "false." It just means that there is more reality to be experienced out there, and that you might be able to achieve such experiences.
* It is ironic that many promoters of the view "our world as a simulation" like you, and Michael Tymn, are cultural conservatives, despairing of the surrounding world sinking into moral relativism of devastating consequences. Ah, if only the young generations would adopt your good, old moral values! And then, what do you have to offer as an alternative? ... That life appears to be a simulation game! It's ridiculous.
Lastly, let me give one more excuse for the imperfections of my comment: I'm an Eastern European, residing in Eastern Europe: there are bound to be international cultural differences between us.
Thanks for your comment. I would say that the phenomenal realm is an illusion only in a relative sense — that is, it’s not the ultimate reality. But it is real for us. If we step in front of a bus, we will get squashed. A video game also is not an illusion per se. It's a real display of pictures and sounds. It’s not a hallucination. It’s just that there is an underlying reality, the source code, which we don’t ordinarily see.
Regarding the whole idea of a simulation, I’m using it only as an analogy. I don’t think the cosmos is literally a computer simulation. That would be a purely materialistic approach (we all live on somebody’s hard drive). I would say that the "source code" of our world exists as thoughts in the mind of God, using the word God in the broadest sense. There may be multiple "programs" running to generate multiple universes. Perhaps this is the "superspectrum" Keel talks about.
Or perhaps not. I could be completely wrong about all of it.
My brain gets bent trying to absorb the various pixelated, multidimensional matrix universe theories. Personally, dark matter and dark energy look like evidence of the spirit world to me. That's where Grandma's ghost really resides.
Bullsh*t, I know, but, when you can't understand it all, credit God and blame the devil.
Works for me. ;)
p.s. The world as a video-game idea was also criticised in this paper I read yesterday, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2743113 , under the section of the second "pathology."
This has been a well-considered overview, and it made me increasingly tense with anticipation of the conclusion.
Then came the conclusion: and my reading it was accompanied by a sigh of relief.
Here are my tentative, sketchy remarks as to why:
Two months ago, obituaries appeared of the outstanding philosopher and physicist Wolfgang Smith who in his writings addressed the enigma that either rivals or absorbs the enigma of paranormal phenomena, of quantum phenomena, and offered a solution based on a worldview shared by all the major ancient worldviews that have existed through most of human history, and a number of them continue to this day. This is a worldview that that makes a distinction between three domains of the cosmos. And it is one that, rather than standing in quiet support of the Kantian separation between the phenomenal and the noumenal, it stands to it in conflict.
In Wolfgang Smith's 2018 interview known as "The Principle" interview, Smith is explicit in his condemnation of the Kantian approach as having ushered into, or at least marked the beginning of two centuries of barren, lifeless philosophising, one disconnected from the lived experiences of ordinary people.
That last point strikes me as 'self-evident.'
Further and slightly more detailed criticism of Kant can be learned on Smith's website, in this article by another prominent philosopher: https://philos-sophia.org/unmasking-ai/
And this is where my remarks start to earn their description of "tentative" and "sketchy." My breadth of reading in philosophy and its history likely surpass that of the average Joe... but not by much!
Having said that, all of the aforesaid is just the weakest and most superficial part of my reasons for dismissing your uncomfortable conclusion. For many years already, the idea that our reality may be an illusion, a simulation akin to a video game, had already struck me as deserving of the waste basket. ... You'll excuse me for being at a loss for words as to why. All deep reasons are hard to put into words, especially if one hasn't tried it before. Just let me do my momentary best:
* An illusion? Even illusions are a part of reality. You may dislike the illusion's fragmentary participation in the reality, but does it make it any less a part of all that exists?
That you are vastly imperfect, does not make your sense of reality "false." It just means that there is more reality to be experienced out there, and that you might be able to achieve such experiences.
* It is ironic that many promoters of the view "our world as a simulation" like you, and Michael Tymn, are cultural conservatives, despairing of the surrounding world sinking into moral relativism of devastating consequences. Ah, if only the young generations would adopt your good, old moral values! And then, what do you have to offer as an alternative? ... That life appears to be a simulation game! It's ridiculous.
Lastly, let me give one more excuse for the imperfections of my comment: I'm an Eastern European, residing in Eastern Europe: there are bound to be international cultural differences between us.
Thanks for your comment. I would say that the phenomenal realm is an illusion only in a relative sense — that is, it’s not the ultimate reality. But it is real for us. If we step in front of a bus, we will get squashed. A video game also is not an illusion per se. It's a real display of pictures and sounds. It’s not a hallucination. It’s just that there is an underlying reality, the source code, which we don’t ordinarily see.
Regarding the whole idea of a simulation, I’m using it only as an analogy. I don’t think the cosmos is literally a computer simulation. That would be a purely materialistic approach (we all live on somebody’s hard drive). I would say that the "source code" of our world exists as thoughts in the mind of God, using the word God in the broadest sense. There may be multiple "programs" running to generate multiple universes. Perhaps this is the "superspectrum" Keel talks about.
Or perhaps not. I could be completely wrong about all of it.
By the way, your English is very good!