God the Programmer

[Reptillian]

Well in my thinking I certainly wasn't considering the existence of a heaven or hell, just existence in this life as we know it (which is possibly all of the existence of human souls that there is). If a heaven can exist, and god does not send certain people, or most people, there, especially for arbitrary reasons, he might as well be the devil, and the whole argument is moot.

I can not see any plausible reason for why it would be necessary for "all sentient beings have to pass through a period of suffering in order to exist in a perfect world."

Its a possibility though, the main point being that without understanding the nature of the program needed to create a thinking entity, we can't really say with confidence that we could simulate a world for them without suffering.

 

[jmvizanko]

Its a possibility though, the main point being that without understanding the nature of the program needed to create a thinking entity, we can't really say with confidence that we could simulate a world for them without suffering.

If I understood you correctly, that is pretty much what I was trying to say above. We just don't know enough about all of the laws behind our existence, the science of the brain, and what other infinitely complex yet better scenarios are possible to, IMO, say that its possible to create a better universe for sentient beings like ourselves to live in.

That being said, considering that I am not somebody that, say, died from a horribly excruciating disease at the age of 6, I am not really in the best position to describe just how stupid it is to have created this universe knowing what it would yield, or not destroy it if I had the capability.

 

[Meow Mix]

I don't think you can make that claim without knowing the code needed to produce a sentient being. Eliminating suffering might lead to a logical contradiction (like defining the same term in two conflicting ways) or might change the nature or perceptions of the being you're trying to create. It could also conflict with your purpose for the being or the overall program. I can imagine a world without suffering, but perhaps thats only because my mind exists in a world with suffering.

Oh yeah, since you're playing around with simulated universes and changing constants...have you been following that "Laws of Physics Vary Throughout the universe" thread? If so, what do you make of that?

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...69-laws-physics-vary-throughout-universe.html

You don't really actually need to know the code to program a sentient being because we're not controlling the sentient beings with the code we're adding; just their environment. I don't see how that could possibly lead to a contradiction.

As for the fine-structure constant I have my doubts about the paper; but we're all waiting for it to get through peer-review. It seems to me odd that a would have a preferred axis that happens to (as far as I can tell) correlate so closely with earth's magnetic poles.

Maybe it would explain why earth's magnetic poles are the way they are... but that leaves the question of why the other planets' poles are all willy nilly. It just seems unlikely, but stranger things have happened -- we'll see.

If true -- IF true -- we'll need to correct Einstein's general relativity. It will also spell defeat for the strong form of using the anthropic principle to explain "fine tuning." (That's a good thing, IMO). It will also mean that more than ever it's likely that we live in a false vacuum, which is bad: just another way doomsday could occur practically at any time for reasons we wouldn't know until it was too late. But, considering the universe has been fine for billions of years so far...

All in all, I don't expect this to make it out of peer review alive. Second, even if it does, I doubt it will be validated by independent experiment.

 

[Meow Mix]

If I understood you correctly, that is pretty much what I was trying to say above. We just don't know enough about all of the laws behind our existence, the science of the brain, and what other infinitely complex yet better scenarios are possible to, IMO, say that its possible to create a better universe for sentient beings like ourselves to live in.

That being said, considering that I am not somebody that, say, died from a horribly excruciating disease at the age of 6, I am not really in the best position to describe just how stupid it is to have created this universe knowing what it would yield, or not destroy it if I had the capability.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to make that assertion.

Any instance in which suffering could arise you just add more code to stop it.

 

[CarlinKnew]

The only thing this omnicrap god would need to do is simply remove the programming inside animals' brains that causes them to feel any sort of pain. That's it. Not complicated. No logical contradictions.

 

[Thief]

I was playing with universe simulators... does that count?

Not a lot of difference.

You're looking to the small scale attempting to ascertain the large scale.
Not altogether invalid...but limited.

Really expect to be sure of God?...poking around in a lab?

What well played experiment did you have in mind?

 

[hyacinthus]

I recall my discussion with a particular Christian from an earlier thread where I was arguing for the ability of God to create a world where there is no suffering

The problem of evil has been vexing Philosophers and religious thinkers since ancient times. It would be clear to any thinking being that the principle of divine justice and mercy seems to be at loggerheads with what reality evidently and painfully manifests. How could a loving God allow suffering to abound in this world? some people got tired of trying to reconcile the contradiction that they made up the "Epicurean Paradox" to show that the notion of a loving God is but a lovely figment of our imagination at best. Some equally vexed and disturbed thinkers like Leibniz begged to differ by saying that this world is the best of all possible worlds, another way of saying that this is the best God can do.

Science or Mathematics doesn't deal with the problem of Evil, yet deep inside we know there are so many wrongs with this world. Thanks to our emotions which is perhaps the sole basis of our morality.

If we can program it, God can do it.

I have been entertaining this idea for some time, especially after watching Matrix the movie. It could be possible that we are but programs created by some entity who made us just for fun.It's a logical possibility backed by our own experience with Games and programs. The Buddhists could be right in asserting that this world is maya.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I'm still trying to figure out why god programmed males to have nipples.

 

[Willamena]

This has to be true. Why couldn't God the Almighty actualize something that we mere mortals can program ourselves?

He's actualized the programming for you --isn't that enough? Heck, he actualized actualization. Why should he "logically" be able to actualize something that's not actually actual?

In fact, we have programs that already exist in which the characters (were they alive) don't suffer.

Yeah --my Sims have loads of sympathy and compassion for each other.

 

[jmvizanko]

The only thing this omnicrap god would need to do is simply remove the programming inside animals' brains that causes them to feel any sort of pain. That's it. Not complicated. No logical contradictions.

Well that totally destroyed my point. Kudos for pointing out what should have been obvious.

 

[Meow Mix]

The only thing this omnicrap god would need to do is simply remove the programming inside animals' brains that causes them to feel any sort of pain. That's it. Not complicated. No logical contradictions.

That could be a start but other things would have to be changed too.

Imagine if you didn't have a sensation of pain and you failed to realize you've just rested your hand on a hot stove burner.

 

[jmvizanko]

That could be a start but other things would have to be changed too.

Imagine if you didn't have a sensation of pain and you failed to realize you've just rested your hand on a hot stove burner.

Perhaps without pain life would develop a more rigorous intelligence for knowing something bad is happening to the body without pain?

Plus it would obviously be much harder to remove emotional pain. Unless that hottie could be forced to stay with me somehow.

 

[Meow Mix]

Perhaps without pain life would develop a more rigorous intelligence for knowing something bad is happening to the body without pain?

Plus it would obviously be much harder to remove emotional pain. Unless that hottie could be forced to stay with me somehow.

At the very least physical pain should be less than it is in this universe if there were a benevolent, omnipotent creator. That's the whole point.

 

[jmvizanko]

At the very least physical pain should be less than it is in this universe if there were a benevolent, omnipotent creator. That's the whole point.

A point I'm not arguing with.

 

[Meow Mix]

A point I'm not arguing with.

Nor will theists for any amount of time on this board. I keep seeing red herrings and special pleading fallacies but not a lot of attention on this damning subject.

 

[Willamena]

Nor will theists for any amount of time on this board. I keep seeing red herrings and special pleading fallacies but not a lot of attention on this damning subject.

Probably because they don't believe in that sort of nonsense.

 

[Thief]

Nor will theists for any amount of time on this board. I keep seeing red herrings and special pleading fallacies but not a lot of attention on this damning subject.

Would a red herring be a direction of thought that you don't like?

Don't like pain?....tough...too bad....

It's part of the 'program'.

 

[CarlinKnew]

That could be a start but other things would have to be changed too.

Not if the goal is to create a universe with sentient life and no suffering.

Imagine if you didn't have a sensation of pain and you failed to realize you've just rested your hand on a hot stove burner.

It wouldn't matter to me because I'd have no concept of pain. Maybe I'd lose my hand; maybe I'd die of infection. No one would be upset about it because no one would feel any sort of pain.

 

[JP of PA]

Nor will theists for any amount of time on this board. I keep seeing red herrings and special pleading fallacies but not a lot of attention on this damning subject.

Okay Miss, I will "argue" it with you.

On what basis do you make your statement -
"At the very least physical pain should be less than it is in this universe if there were a benevolent, omnipotent creator. That's the whole point." ?

 

[branson]

Okay Miss, I will "argue" it with you.

On what basis do you make your statement -
"At the very least physical pain should be less than it is in this universe if there were a benevolent, omnipotent creator. That's the whole point." ?

how about there is no point, we make up reasons to feel important, we invent a god to make us think we are not alone. the meaning of life is there is no meaning, its just a cycle that keeps repeating untill the sun goes super nova an thats if we dont destroy ourselves first.