Fabulous post, Jason. Enthralling stuff.
Kim On 08/05/2009, at 9:20 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > If we on this list believe that everything (or at least everything > with a self consistent definition) exists, then we must also believe > that all possible gods exist. Be they artificial intelligences that > occur in the universal dovetailer with access to unbounded computing > power and memory, an evolved species who reaches an omega point or > technological singularity, or anything else you might imagine. What > can we say about the personalities, behaviors and abilities of these > gods? > > It is said that when intelligent people disagree, it is often due to a > difference in available data. Assuming these gods all possess > superior intellects, then they should all come to the same conclusion > when presented with the same data. Mathematics, containing universal > truths and accessible regardless of the physical universe or > environment one finds his or her self in, might serve as a platform > for all gods to reach identical conclusions regarding everything. > > Perhaps they would also conclude or even prove the existence of all > else as we on the everything list believe. If it is possible, I would > expect those gods would develop a model for consciousness, which would > likely lead to the idea that other self-aware structures in math > exist, and perceive. Though no god would have the power to eliminate > what inevitably exists in math (thus explaining the problem of evil), > they would still be able to run simulations of their own over which > they may exercise full control. Perhaps the gods explore reality and > the limits of consciousness by instantiating universes and the > observers they contain, but for the god to really 'know' what it is > like to be someone else, that persons memories and experiences must > somehow be merged into the mind of that god, not simply simulated > (Like Mary the color scientist). > > Thus whatever gods are simulating this universe (and inevitably some > explanations for our universe include a higher level simulation) then > we might be able to conclude some beliefs or properties of that god if > we assume that whatever truth we may find, the mind of God has already > come upon. > > This is just one narrow definition of god as a creator, yet there are > certainly others. A monotheistic God might have to be equivalent to > the everything, as it would be the only object for which there are no > others, and would be the ultimate source of the existence of all else > including the 'lesser gods' discussed above. We could also choose to > define God as the collection of all first person experiences, meaning > each of us is a small part of God. Interestingly you can somewhat map > these different god definitions to the trinity from Christianity. > > Jason > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---