Simulation Theory and The Theory that Nothing Exists
Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:07 pm
Recently I have been engaged in discussion [which started with this post] regarding the existence of nothing [aka "no-thing"?] and since the discussion fragmented from the main topic subject, I thought I would start a thread in this forum to invite discussion on both ideas and whether The Theory Nothing Exists is compatible with Simulation Theory.
To flesh out what I [at least] understand about The Theory Nothing Exists, it is not positing that no-thing(s) exist, but rather, that there is an actual counterpart to existence which is "non-existence", and that non-existence actually exists as something which can be either experienced as real or conceptualized as possibly real.
It appears that the main reason for the positing that nothing exists is that most humans seem to have a memory of not existing..or to the point - emerging from a state of nothing into something, therefore, since we apparently come from nothing, then it must exist, for that is where we come from.
The Simulation Theory posits that we exist within a reality simulation [one among possibly countless simulations] so in a sense we are not experiencing anything which is real. The things we think we are experiencing are not real but simulated to be experienced as real.
Q: Are both theories able to be shown as non-contradictory to each other?
Simulation theory also implies a created thing, effectively pointing to the expanded idea that IF we are experiencing a Reality Simulation, THEN there has to be a Creator [or Creators] involved.
Is this compatible with The Nothing Exists Theory?
Obviously those smart enough would reply "Yes!" because Simulation Theory could include the possibility that a 'nothing' sector was built into the overall simulation.
We can point to our own experience of coming into this reality, as we have a memory of having come out of such a sector.
But then of course, we have to acknowledge that the "nothing sector" resides within the simulation, and so is only real to those also within the simulation. That in itself does not give us an adequate answer to the question "Is nothing an actual real place which has to also exist outside of this simulation, but is not a simulation itself?"
Which places the focus of attention upon The Creator(s) position outside of this simulation. Is/are The Creator(s) themselves existing within a simulation - [intelligence would favor the 'yes' answer] and if so, how do we know that this pattern doesn't repeat itself? [infinite regress fallacy]
The answer is that infinite regress is illogical. At some point there has to be a "Source-Point" otherwise Simulation Theory would have to be dismissed as an explanation for existence. Or if not completely dismissed, then one would have to conclude that everything and nothing is simulated and nothing created everything and everything created nothing.
It becomes an eternal loop which - going nowhere - [we don't know where] - seems pointless in relation to consciousness, which has the unfortunate role of having to experience simulated reality, because consciousness too comes from nothing/something/something/nothing and is simulated.
Therefore the only way to make conscious experience sensible in relation to Simulation Theory and Nothing Exists Theory is to remove the illogical infinite regress fallacy, which leaves us with the idea that At Some Point there was/is an Original Creator [not Creators] and it is from this origin, that all else became through and Original Simulator created by the original Creator.
In relation to the idea that our simulated reality was created by creators who themselves were/are in an simulation - this idea should be included for the sake of fairness, but ultimately doesn't [shouldn't?] matter.
This premise;
"We exist within a reality simulation which itself was created by Creator(s) who also exist in a reality simulation which itself was created by a Creator who has always existed and does not come from 'nowhere/nothing' - as in - that is the Original Creator and the Original Creator does not have the memory of once not existing - iow - does not have a memory of nothing existing, and in that, Nothing does not exist as far as The Original Creator is concerned."
In that premise, both Theories are compatible with one another.
That is the short and curlies of it.
Intelligent Comments, as usual, most welcome
To flesh out what I [at least] understand about The Theory Nothing Exists, it is not positing that no-thing(s) exist, but rather, that there is an actual counterpart to existence which is "non-existence", and that non-existence actually exists as something which can be either experienced as real or conceptualized as possibly real.
It appears that the main reason for the positing that nothing exists is that most humans seem to have a memory of not existing..or to the point - emerging from a state of nothing into something, therefore, since we apparently come from nothing, then it must exist, for that is where we come from.
The Simulation Theory posits that we exist within a reality simulation [one among possibly countless simulations] so in a sense we are not experiencing anything which is real. The things we think we are experiencing are not real but simulated to be experienced as real.
Q: Are both theories able to be shown as non-contradictory to each other?
Simulation theory also implies a created thing, effectively pointing to the expanded idea that IF we are experiencing a Reality Simulation, THEN there has to be a Creator [or Creators] involved.
Is this compatible with The Nothing Exists Theory?
Obviously those smart enough would reply "Yes!" because Simulation Theory could include the possibility that a 'nothing' sector was built into the overall simulation.
We can point to our own experience of coming into this reality, as we have a memory of having come out of such a sector.
But then of course, we have to acknowledge that the "nothing sector" resides within the simulation, and so is only real to those also within the simulation. That in itself does not give us an adequate answer to the question "Is nothing an actual real place which has to also exist outside of this simulation, but is not a simulation itself?"
Which places the focus of attention upon The Creator(s) position outside of this simulation. Is/are The Creator(s) themselves existing within a simulation - [intelligence would favor the 'yes' answer] and if so, how do we know that this pattern doesn't repeat itself? [infinite regress fallacy]
The answer is that infinite regress is illogical. At some point there has to be a "Source-Point" otherwise Simulation Theory would have to be dismissed as an explanation for existence. Or if not completely dismissed, then one would have to conclude that everything and nothing is simulated and nothing created everything and everything created nothing.
It becomes an eternal loop which - going nowhere - [we don't know where] - seems pointless in relation to consciousness, which has the unfortunate role of having to experience simulated reality, because consciousness too comes from nothing/something/something/nothing and is simulated.
Therefore the only way to make conscious experience sensible in relation to Simulation Theory and Nothing Exists Theory is to remove the illogical infinite regress fallacy, which leaves us with the idea that At Some Point there was/is an Original Creator [not Creators] and it is from this origin, that all else became through and Original Simulator created by the original Creator.
In relation to the idea that our simulated reality was created by creators who themselves were/are in an simulation - this idea should be included for the sake of fairness, but ultimately doesn't [shouldn't?] matter.
This premise;
"We exist within a reality simulation which itself was created by Creator(s) who also exist in a reality simulation which itself was created by a Creator who has always existed and does not come from 'nowhere/nothing' - as in - that is the Original Creator and the Original Creator does not have the memory of once not existing - iow - does not have a memory of nothing existing, and in that, Nothing does not exist as far as The Original Creator is concerned."
In that premise, both Theories are compatible with one another.
That is the short and curlies of it.
Intelligent Comments, as usual, most welcome