slimboyfat

Joined

• started 539 topics
• posted 17,694 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by slimboyfat

• 
  70

  Are we in a computer simulation?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmk2viuqba.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/simulation_hypothesis.

  consequences of living in a simulation[edit]some scholars speculate that the creators of our hypothetical simulation may have limited computing power; if so, after a certain point, the creators would have to deploy some sort of strategy to prevent simulations from themselves indefinitely creating high-fidelity simulations in unbounded regress.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Assuming for a moment that we are in a simulation - then it follows we should be able to show that simulations can produce consciousness.

  
  

  Or that we should be able to in the future. I don't think anyone is saying it's already possible.

  But what are the reasons for suspecting it will not be possible? Only on mystical grounds when you think about it. Consider this thought experiment: imagine the technology existed to replicate your physical body atom for atom including your brain. Would that new being possess consciousness? A committed materialist would surely need to answer yes. To answer otherwise would need to invoke a substance other than the material as being involved in consciousness. If nothing is involved in consciousness other than the material, then it follows that the ability to minutely engineer matter will result in the ability to replicate consciousness. If you say there is more to consciousness than replicating its material conditions then you are not a materialist!
• 
  70

  Are we in a computer simulation?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmk2viuqba.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/simulation_hypothesis.

  consequences of living in a simulation[edit]some scholars speculate that the creators of our hypothetical simulation may have limited computing power; if so, after a certain point, the creators would have to deploy some sort of strategy to prevent simulations from themselves indefinitely creating high-fidelity simulations in unbounded regress.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Okay I tried twice to show how it is begging the question. I won't flog a dead horse.

  I'll just point out that "all the evidence" you think shows we are physical creatures could equally be evidence that we are simulations of physical creatures. We cannot know which. We know we have consciousness. We don't know this has a purely physical base. We know it looks like it is purely physical, but that's what we'd expect from a simulation also. That's the point at issue. Simply saying "it looks this way" doesn't solve the puzzle.

  By the way I completely understand the point you are making. You are saying that, as sophisticated as simulations may be, there is no evidence that any entity within an simulation possesses consciousness. I completely understand this point you are making. But I also understand that it misses the point. In order to make the statement "we know of no simulation that possesses consciousness" you need to make the prior assumption that we ourselves are not simulations. And if you allow for that assumption you are begging the question.

  There I go, I tried a third time.
• 
  70

  Are we in a computer simulation?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmk2viuqba.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/simulation_hypothesis.

  consequences of living in a simulation[edit]some scholars speculate that the creators of our hypothetical simulation may have limited computing power; if so, after a certain point, the creators would have to deploy some sort of strategy to prevent simulations from themselves indefinitely creating high-fidelity simulations in unbounded regress.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Our physical brains? As in the very brains that we are trying to work out if they are purely material or if they are a simulation? If your argument assumes that they are purely physical to start with that's called begging the question.

  You cant say "we know purely material brains give rise to consciousness because our brains are purely material and they give rise to consciousness" within the context of a discussion about whether our brains are purely material or part of a simulation. Because if we "knew" that, then we'd already know the answer to the very thing we are calling into question. And if we already "know" that our brains are not a simulation then there's no point having a discussion.
• 
  245

  Is the Watchtower shy about repeating their new "generation" teaching?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  as i recall in the 1980s talks and watchtower literature, magazines and books were always talking about the "generation" teaching and how it proved armageddon was going to come any day now.. but am i correct in thinking they have only actually mentioned the new "overlapping generations" teaching once or twice in the literature?

  why are they so shy about talking about their great new interpretation?

  it's almost enough to make you suspect they are a embarrassed about it.. mention it once or twice, don't dwell on it, hope everyone just accepts it, and don't bring it up again.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Yes Ray Kurzweil and Aubrey de Grey are the secular equivalent.
• 
  245

  Is the Watchtower shy about repeating their new "generation" teaching?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  as i recall in the 1980s talks and watchtower literature, magazines and books were always talking about the "generation" teaching and how it proved armageddon was going to come any day now.. but am i correct in thinking they have only actually mentioned the new "overlapping generations" teaching once or twice in the literature?

  why are they so shy about talking about their great new interpretation?

  it's almost enough to make you suspect they are a embarrassed about it.. mention it once or twice, don't dwell on it, hope everyone just accepts it, and don't bring it up again.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Well Splane wasn't shy about demonstrating the doctrine with "visual aids" on JW TV. Maybe he devised the doctrine and has been handed the "privilege" of writing about it and explaining it on TV.
• 
  7

  "Age to Come" Christianity vs. Adventism

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i often read that ct russell was more influenced by "age-to-come" christians than adventist christians.

  what exactly is "age to come" christianity?

  what are some of its denominations?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  I was thinking of buying that but it's a bit expensive. It talks about Age to Come?
• 
  7

  "Age to Come" Christianity vs. Adventism

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i often read that ct russell was more influenced by "age-to-come" christians than adventist christians.

  what exactly is "age to come" christianity?

  what are some of its denominations?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  What other places? I can't find anything from a Google search.
• 
  70

  Are we in a computer simulation?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmk2viuqba.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/simulation_hypothesis.

  consequences of living in a simulation[edit]some scholars speculate that the creators of our hypothetical simulation may have limited computing power; if so, after a certain point, the creators would have to deploy some sort of strategy to prevent simulations from themselves indefinitely creating high-fidelity simulations in unbounded regress.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  I don't think that's the killer objection you take it to be.

  After all, is there any evidence that cumulative events in a purely material reality can create consciousness? If you say we are such evidence it rather begs the question.
• 
  70

  Are we in a computer simulation?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmk2viuqba.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/simulation_hypothesis.

  consequences of living in a simulation[edit]some scholars speculate that the creators of our hypothetical simulation may have limited computing power; if so, after a certain point, the creators would have to deploy some sort of strategy to prevent simulations from themselves indefinitely creating high-fidelity simulations in unbounded regress.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Not exactly an analytical response from Dawkins there. Atheists seems to have real difficultly with the simulation argument, just laugh it off, or change the subject.
• 
  26

  Are gays really condemned in the Bible?

  by jws in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so i was having this argument with a friend about the westboro baptist idiots.

  my point is that while they are horrible people, they are pretty much right in that the bible is against gays because it has verses in both the old and the new testament.

  which is one of many reasons to reject the bible as merely man-made rules from ancient middle-easterners.. and she argued that there are problems in translation, etc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Because they were perhaps more enlightened than some in the 20th century? Progress has not be linear or consistent on this issue. From Wikipedia:

  
  

  In ancient Assyria, homosexuality was present and common; it was also not prohibited, condemned, nor looked upon as immoral or disordered. Some religious texts contain prayers for divine blessings on homosexual relationships.[85][86] The Almanac of Incantations contained prayers favoring on an equal basis the love of a man for a woman, of a woman for a man, and of a man for man.[87]

  In Greater Iran, homosexuality and homoerotic expressions were tolerated in numerous public places, from monasteries and seminaries to taverns, military camps, bathhouses, and coffee houses. In the early Safavid dynasty (1501–1723), male houses of prostitution (amrad khane) were legally recognized and paid taxes.

  Some scholars argue that there are examples of homosexual love in ancient literature, like in the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh as well as in the Biblical story of David and Jonathan. In the Epic of Gilgamesh, the relationship between the main protagonist Gilgamesh and the character Enkidu has been seen by some to be homosexual in nature.[88][89][90][91] Similarly, David's love for Jonathan is "greater than the love of women."[92]

  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Middle_East