This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Science in Hollywood

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Jump to comment 30 by God fearing Atheist

Assume the SciFi concept of a "universe simulator"

They are created by gods and given to their kids as computer games.

Our universe is such a simulation. The simulation is a closure from the perspective of the simulated entities inside (us). There is no possible way we can know about anything outside the simulation, or ever gain any evidence there even is an outside.

However, god child, lets call him Kevin, can both save bit of the simulation, archive them and/or plug them into other simulations. Kevin can also interfere with the simulations.

If Kevin saves the state of simulated human minds at "death" and plugs them into another simulation we have an afterlife. Because the system is output only, we have no evidence at all for this process.

However, if Kevin uses any input facilities at all we immediately have theoretical evidence of Kevin's meddling. The closure of the simulation is broken, and Kevin is part of the universe. I said theoretical, rather than practical, as Kevin could interfere at about the level of simulated noise in the system (the level theists claim for miracles), and be as hard to detect as he is ineffective at influencing what goes no. However, whatever the level of interference from Kevin he has now made himself part of the universe and capable of detection and investigation by the scientific method by the inhabitants of the simulated universe.

This is precisely what theists claim. They claim to know what Kevin wants, he talks to some of them, he lays down rules, and when he scrapes out souls on death he places them in other universe simulators - "hell" and "heaven" according to how well they obayed the rules he input. This religious view (theism) is a scientific hypothesis and is scientifically testable.

If Kevin takes output only - he just watches, we have no way of knowing, and the hypothesis is not scientifically testable. Its is deism and is irrelevant to human affairs.

If Kevin takes output only; he watches but also scrapes souls; again we have no way of knowing. It is not scientificaly testable. It might be useful to know what Kevin does with the souls, but for all we know he likes horror movies and only the nastiest psychopaths are scraped for "Kevins horror show universe". Since we can't know by definition, again it is irrelevant for human affairs.

In conclusion: If god is relevant, god is part of the universe, and the god hypothesis is theoretically scientifically testable. If god is not part of the universe, is "super natural" or "outside the universe", the god hypothsis is not scientifically testable but is irrelevant to human affairs.

Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:39:00 UTC | #413049