IF the universe was created THEN...

[VVilliam]

So far it appears what you are saying is that the creator does not exist in a place. Would that be correct?

Your wording is problematic again, but maybe we can fix it.

Maybe it works just fine and all that is required is that you get the gist of what I am trying to say, rather than playing with it.

God "exists," but not as subject to space-time. He exists as both transcendent and immanent, if you're familiar with those terms. Basically, it means he's capable of acting within the reality we experience, but is not bound by it. That's what we Theists believe.

Yes I got the gist of that.

But you haven't answered if this god exists in a place? To example, many theists believe god exists in a place called 'heaven'.

As to what "we Theists believe", this infers all theists believe the same thing about god. Is that what you are trying to imply?

Also, if god can interact with the reality we experience, do you think that god sees our reality as 'real'?

[see my post re your theory on hallucination for more re that] [Link]

[Immanuel Can]

you haven't answered if this god exists in a place?

Actually, I did. God "exists" but is not local, so does not exist "in a place."

As to what "we Theists believe", this infers all theists believe the same thing about god. Is that what you are trying to imply?

Well, that's not true, of course. I was using Theist merely as a term for Jews and Christians, primarily, although some such claims would also apply to other groups as well.

[Immanuel Can]

[see my post re your theory on hallucination for more re that] [Link]

I answered that. Read my next message again, if you need to.

[VVilliam]

you haven't answered if this god exists in a place?

Actually, I did. God "exists" but is not local, so does not exist "in a place."

So The Creator exists but does not exist within a place [such as heaven]

So now about my observation of your hallucination theory...can you answer those questions?

And also - are you able to answer how your god would view our reality? Do you think He' would see it as 'real' or simply something created to be experienced as real by those within it.

I think - from what you claim about your god - that he would only regard the creator [himself] as real and everything else as "simulated"...[not really real...more imagined ] Is there a better word than "simulated" to describe the creators imagination being able to actually create things which are not real [in comparison to the creator being the only 'real' that is real.]

[VVilliam]

[see my post re your theory on hallucination for more re that] [Link]

I answered that. Read my next message again, if you need to.

I think you are gaming me.

But anyway - was your answer about the creator being able to inject his power into our reality your explanation for why those things I mentioned, you can regard as 'real' rather than hallucination?

[VVilliam]

While you think on your answers I will get about asking this question;

Why would a believer in this god called this universe [place] real?

Surely you can understand from what you have claimed about the creator, that he must see this universe as a simulation which he created.

Furthermore, he can interact with his simulation in order to make thing appear to happen in relation to those within said simulation.

He can make Adam and Eve think they are talking with a Wise Serpent.

He can make the lions think that Daniel is non-edible.

He can make a group of men fishing think that Jesus was walking on water.

He can make Saul think he was encountering a vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus

He can even uplift the beloved disciple John and give John a fully immersed experience of yet another simulation which said disciple then reports to other humans about his experience in that alternate reality.

He can also give William a few experience in order to show William a thing or two about what William thinks/assumes about reality in relation to what actually is reality.

So IF the creator can do as you claim, THEN the creator has to see the truth that his creation is a "simulation" which was created for a purpose.

Which then has me asking you that if your god sees our reality as not really real, why would you insist that it is really real...even to the point of using a classical atheist argument [you could be hallucinating] in order to try to debunk my argument?

[Immanuel Can]

So now about my observation of your hallucination theory...can you answer those questions?

Twist. I won't buy in. I told you...I can see that technique. You're not fooling anyone.

I don't have a "hallucination theory." What I said was that you were describing hallucinations.

[VVilliam]

So now about my observation of your hallucination theory...can you answer those questions?

Twist. I won't buy in. I told you...I can see that technique. You're not fooling anyone.

I don't have a "hallucination theory." What I said was that you were describing hallucinations.

Indeed. I am not arguing you said anything else. I will continue to argue that you are willfully resisting [won't buy into] my rational argument against your own claims in relation to experiences people like myself and Jesus and Saul and Daniel and Adam and Eve and John the Beloved Disciple have.
I will also continue to point out that the creator obviously sees our universe as something he simulated, because that is the only rational conclusion one can come to based upon your claims about the creator.

In that, I have successfully argued that we should also learn to see our universe in the same way that the creator sees it.

[seeds]

IF the universe was created THEN...we must exist within some type of Simulated Reality.

What it is simulating is beyond our reach with the present devices of science.

First of all, pretty much everyone has experienced a dream whose features and circumstances seemed to be almost as "real" as the reality we experience while awake.

And with that in mind, as a fanciful thought experiment, imagine yourself as being a lucid dreamer who is extremely good at creating a highly detailed dream of a cityscape, for example, filled with buildings, and cars, and humans...

...all of which are, of course, created from the living, holographic-like imaging substances of your very own mind.

Next, imagine that one of the humans in your dream somehow managed to "wake-up" and acquire a self-aware state of consciousness just like you (i.e., its own autonomous mind with all of the trappings therein).

Now imagine that said consciousness not only gained independent control over the body it possesses in the dream that you created, but also has multi-sensory access and awareness of the phenomenal features of the entire cityscape.

I'm talking about access and awareness to a point where it (the simulated dream city) appears to be just as real to him or her as New York City (or wherever) appears to you while awake.

And the point is that, at least according to this fanciful thought experiment, a consciousness could indeed exist within the context of a created "simulation" and not understand how the simulation came into existence.

And of course, the integrity and viability of the "simulation" would be dependent upon the fact that you (the dream-creating entity) do not reveal your existence to him or her.

Indeed, what would you even look like in that context?

Because whatever it is that is creating the "simulation" (dreaming the dream) is surely not going to look like that blob of snoring/gas-passing flesh, drooling on a pillow in a darkened bedroom.

Are we able to identify possible evidence which scientific research has uncovered within this universe which could point to the possibility we do actually exist within a creation?

I strongly suggest that science has already identified at least a degree of "circumstantial" evidence that such may indeed be the case.

And that's because science, or, more specifically, quantum science has discovered that the phenomenal features of the universe seem to be created from an infinitely malleable, informationally-based (holographic-like) substance that is capable of becoming absolutely anything "imaginable" (just like the substance from which our thoughts and dreams are created).

In other words, the outer-workings of the universe seem to resemble the inner-workings of our own minds.
_______

[VVilliam]

IF the universe was created THEN...we must exist within some type of Simulated Reality.

What it is simulating is beyond our reach with the present devices of science.

First of all, pretty much everyone has experienced a dream whose features and circumstances seemed to be almost as "real" as the reality we experience while awake.

A reasonable enough assumption, I concur.

And with that in mind, as a fanciful thought experiment, imagine yourself as being a lucid dreamer who is extremely good at creating a highly detailed dream of a cityscape, for example, filled with buildings, and cars, and humans...

...all of which are, of course, created from the living, holographic-like imaging substances of your very own mind.

I have actually done this and the place sits at the hub of an infinite series of hologram universes. These universes consist of everything imagined by everything which can imagine...including heavens and hells etc...

Next, imagine that one of the humans in your dream somehow managed to "wake-up" and acquire a self-aware state of consciousness just like you (i.e., its own autonomous mind with all of the trappings therein).

Okay....

Now imagine that said consciousness not only gained independent control over the body it possesses in the dream that you created, but also has multi-sensory access and awareness of the phenomenal features of the entire cityscape.

Righto...

I'm talking about access and awareness to a point where it (the simulated dream city) appears to be just as real to him or her as New York City (or wherever) appears to you while awake.

Understand...

And the point is that, at least according to this fanciful thought experiment, a consciousness could indeed exist within the context of a created "simulation" and not understand how the simulation came into existence.

True - unless I told it in a way that it could understand...after all I must have created it with the potential to understand...when I imagined that individual being able to wake up etc...

And not to forget that we do not know that our dreams are themselves reality simulations and were not actually created by us - but just experienced by us...

And of course, the integrity and viability of the "simulation" would be dependent upon the fact that you (the dream-creating entity) do not reveal your existence to him or her.

Assuming that I - the creator - intended that the "simulation" could be revealed to any within it...and understood that the integrity of the simulation could not be affected by anyone within it waking up to that understanding of what they were within...

Indeed, what would you even look like in that context?

I would not have to look like anything. I would only have to communicate with the individual...

Because whatever it is that is creating the "simulation" (dreaming the dream) is surely not going to look like that blob of snoring/gas-passing flesh, drooling on a pillow in a darkened bedroom.

I could make myself appear as some type of entity I suppose...if I thought it would help the individual. But the fact of the matter is that [in the case of your particular analogy] the creator of the dream is indeed dreaming and thus is "that blob of snoring/gas-passing flesh, drooling on a pillow in a darkened bedroom" but what of that?

Are we able to identify possible evidence which scientific research has uncovered within this universe which could point to the possibility we do actually exist within a creation?

I strongly suggest that science has already identified at least a degree of "circumstantial" evidence that such may indeed be the case.

Interesting...

And that's because science, or, more specifically, quantum science has discovered that the phenomenal features of the universe seem to be created from an infinitely malleable, informationally-based (holographic-like) substance that is capable of becoming absolutely anything "imaginable" (just like the substance from which our thoughts and dreams are created).

In other words, the outer-workings of the universe seem to resemble the inner-workings of our own minds.
_______

Yes - I understand this to be the case...but how to make a scientific instrument which can help us to communicate with said creator and thus show data [evidence] that we do indeed exist in a creation of which there is a creator...

[Immanuel Can]

...you are willfully resisting [won't buy into] my rational argument...

Make one, and see if I buy in. "I think this world is a simulation" isn't an argument. It's a speculation.

[seeds]

And with that in mind, as a fanciful thought experiment, imagine yourself as being a lucid dreamer who is extremely good at creating a highly detailed dream of a cityscape, for example, filled with buildings, and cars, and humans...

...all of which are, of course, created from the living, holographic-like imaging substances of your very own mind.

I have actually done this and the place sits at the hub of an infinite series of hologram universes. These universes consist of everything imagined by everything which can imagine...including heavens and hells etc...

Cool. How many hits of acid were required?

Kidding aside, that does kind of contradict what you said later about simulations (dreams) not actually being created by us (see below).

And the point is that, at least according to this fanciful thought experiment, a consciousness could indeed exist within the context of a created "simulation" and not understand how the simulation came into existence.

True - unless I told it in a way that it could understand...after all I must have created it with the potential to understand...when I imagined that individual being able to wake up etc...

And not to forget that we do not know that our dreams are themselves reality simulations and were not actually created by us - but just experienced by us...

Well, that's why I used the term "lucid dreamer," which refers to someone that can indeed create and control the conditions set forth in a dream, and are not merely passively experiencing something that randomly appears in their mind.

Indeed, what would you even look like in that context?

I would not have to look like anything. I would only have to communicate with the individual...

Yes, you could communicate with the individual by any means you wish (via a "burning bush," for example). However, that doesn't shed any light on the mystery of what the "eye" of your mind (your "I am-ness") actually looks like within the subjective "arena" where you create and interact with your dreams.

In other words, if you created a mirror out of your dream substances, looking into it with the eye of your mind, what would you see?

Because whatever it is that is creating the "simulation" (dreaming the dream) is surely not going to look like that blob of snoring/gas-passing flesh, drooling on a pillow in a darkened bedroom.

I could make myself appear as some type of entity I suppose...if I thought it would help the individual. But the fact of the matter is that [in the case of your particular analogy] the creator of the dream is indeed dreaming and thus is "that blob of snoring/gas-passing flesh, drooling on a pillow in a darkened bedroom" but what of that?

No. The creator of the dream is not that gas-passing blob of snoring flesh, drooling on a pillow (indeed, that's just a human shaped arrangement of quantum particles). The actual form of the creator of the dream would be whatever it is you see when you look into that dream mirror.

Are we able to identify possible evidence which scientific research has uncovered within this universe which could point to the possibility we do actually exist within a creation?

...science, or, more specifically, quantum science has discovered that the phenomenal features of the universe seem to be created from an infinitely malleable, informationally-based (holographic-like) substance that is capable of becoming absolutely anything "imaginable" (just like the substance from which our thoughts and dreams are created).

In other words, the outer-workings of the universe seem to resemble the inner-workings of our own minds.

Yes - I understand this to be the case...but how to make a scientific instrument which can help us to communicate with said creator and thus show data [evidence] that we do indeed exist in a creation of which there is a creator...

Pivoting over to what we are actually talking about here, clearly, if the unfathomably advanced Creator of our particular simulation (the universe) wanted us to know (beyond any doubt) that he (she/it) exists, then he could reveal himself anytime he wishes.

In which case, if such an advanced Being truly does exist, then he must have a really good reason for staying hidden.

Therefore, it is highly unlikely that we would be allowed to create a "scientific instrument" to communicate with a Being who doesn't want to be communicated with through any means (or devices) that would irrefutably prove his existence.
_______

[VVilliam]

...you are willfully resisting [won't buy into] my rational argument...

Make one, and see if I buy in. "I think this world is a simulation" isn't an argument. It's a speculation.

I gave you a list of biblical characters who are reported to have had alternate experiences, and you have chosen to ignore that.

If you want to argue that they did not experiece hallucinations, then you can give rational reason as to why you think that is the case.

I even started a thread named Biblical Hallucinations where you can explain why you can refer to the universe as real when obviously the god of chrstianity does not and treats it for what it is. A creation/simulated reality which he interacts with.

[VVilliam]

And with that in mind, as a fanciful thought experiment, imagine yourself as being a lucid dreamer who is extremely good at creating a highly detailed dream of a cityscape, for example, filled with buildings, and cars, and humans...

...all of which are, of course, created from the living, holographic-like imaging substances of your very own mind.

I have actually done this and the place sits at the hub of an infinite series of hologram universes. These universes consist of everything imagined by everything which can imagine...including heavens and hells etc...

Cool. How many hits of acid were required?

Kidding aside, that does kind of contradict what you said later about simulations (dreams) not actually being created by us (see below).

Yep my bad - I saw the word 'imagine' and missed the lucid dream bit...So no - what I created in my imagination is not something I created with lucid dreaming.

And the point is that, at least according to this fanciful thought experiment, a consciousness could indeed exist within the context of a created "simulation" and not understand how the simulation came into existence.

True - unless I told it in a way that it could understand...after all I must have created it with the potential to understand...when I imagined that individual being able to wake up etc...

And not to forget that we do not know that our dreams are themselves reality simulations and were not actually created by us - but just experienced by us...

Well, that's why I used the term "lucid dreamer," which refers to someone that can indeed create and control the conditions set forth in a dream, and are not merely passively experiencing something that randomly appears in their mind.

Understand...

Indeed, what would you even look like in that context?

I would not have to look like anything. I would only have to communicate with the individual...

Yes, you could communicate with the individual by any means you wish (via a "burning bush," for example). However, that doesn't shed any light on the mystery of what the "eye" of your mind (your "I am-ness") actually looks like within the subjective "arena" where you create and interact with your dreams.

In other words, if you created a mirror out of your dream substances, looking into it with the eye of your mind, what would you see?

Whatever I wished to place upon the mirror.

Because whatever it is that is creating the "simulation" (dreaming the dream) is surely not going to look like that blob of snoring/gas-passing flesh, drooling on a pillow in a darkened bedroom.

I could make myself appear as some type of entity I suppose...if I thought it would help the individual. But the fact of the matter is that [in the case of your particular analogy] the creator of the dream is indeed dreaming and thus is "that blob of snoring/gas-passing flesh, drooling on a pillow in a darkened bedroom" but what of that?

No. The creator of the dream is not that gas-passing blob of snoring flesh, drooling on a pillow (indeed, that's just a human shaped arrangement of quantum particles). The actual form of the creator of the dream would be whatever it is you see when you look into that dream mirror.

I have a recollection of a dream I had recently where a mirror was involved but I saw no image reflected...

Are we able to identify possible evidence which scientific research has uncovered within this universe which could point to the possibility we do actually exist within a creation?

...science, or, more specifically, quantum science has discovered that the phenomenal features of the universe seem to be created from an infinitely malleable, informationally-based (holographic-like) substance that is capable of becoming absolutely anything "imaginable" (just like the substance from which our thoughts and dreams are created).

In other words, the outer-workings of the universe seem to resemble the inner-workings of our own minds.

Yes - I understand this to be the case...but how to make a scientific instrument which can help us to communicate with said creator and thus show data [evidence] that we do indeed exist in a creation of which there is a creator...

Pivoting over to what we are actually talking about here, clearly, if the unfathomably advanced Creator of our particular simulation (the universe) wanted us to know (beyond any doubt) that he (she/it) exists, then he could reveal himself anytime he wishes.

One might assume - but I wonder if that is a realistic assumption...it seems too sweeping...

In which case, if such an advanced Being truly does exist, then he must have a really good reason for staying hidden.

That is more likely yes.

Therefore, it is highly unlikely that we would be allowed to create a "scientific instrument" to communicate with a Being who doesn't want to be communicated with through any means (or devices) that would irrefutably prove his existence.

Possibly.

But when observing the physical universe and also taking into account the fact that we are even discussing the possibility of a creator, we can understand that it is not likely to be the case of 'not being allowed'.
For example, since humanity became self aware, the idea of a creator has been part of that dynamic, so it must be part of the 'program'.

Also, we might not be actually in a dream in the mind of the creator of this universe. This universe could be the product of a machine which was created for the purpose of those using it being able to have alternate experiences...it may have been created by creators, rather than just a creator.

So the lucid dream analogy might not be the best one to use...

It may be that the best those outside of the simulation could do is hint rather than outright reveal themselves. It may not even be possible for them to reveal themselves through an image - I mean - what would convince me that a visible being claiming to be the creator of this universe paying me a visit, that it was in fact the creator of this universe and not some entity just wanting me to believe it on its word.

Rather I am [mostly] convinced that we do exist within a simulation and accept that this implies a creator, but since I have had alternate experiences [not just lucid dreams but even better than lucid dreams] these are enough evidence. I do not see how 'seeing the creator' could convince me even more...but interesting stuff to yap about for sure...hopefully we will continue discussing the pros and cons...

[commonsense]

...you are willfully resisting [won't buy into] my rational argument...

Make one, and see if I buy in. "I think this world is a simulation" isn't an argument. It's a speculation.

VV can turn that speculation into an argument if he can access information (I.e. scientific evidence) that reveals that the simulation is a simulation. Although he has asserted that such evidence is available, I don’t recall any example nor any explanation of the assertion.

I am waiting for more from VV with keen anticipation.