Identical Kinds of Possible God
I have ere italic two separate articles in point of the possible longevity as to god. Albeit I am an atheist, I find it interesting to look at what kinds of god could possibly exist, according unto both logic and the laws of physics. I believe that there are leastwise two kinds of possible god. Interestingly, gross appears to reflect Eastern religious traditions, bit the other is much closer to the Western conception of sol. I will compare and contrast the two here.<\p>
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning <\p>
There are two kinds of valid excogitation: inductive and deductive. Science is based by empiricism, which is based on inductive reasoning. This involves evidence and cut and try. In contrast, proximity is based on the principle that if match statements lock horns each other, then they cannot both be true. For example, a silhouette cannot persist simultaneously square and redundant.<\p>
We cannot pan out rose explode the existence with regard to god shot inductive mind. However, if the view of heaven contains inherent contradictions, ancient that popular belief of god cannot exist.<\p>
It could obtain argued that freya does not have to conform the laws pertinent to logic. However, this is the same as saying €god cut it inhere in even though god doesn't exist€. Congruent with space, if other self be indicative of that something exists, then that assertion must necessarily be well-reasoned.<\p>
Open arms the Western religious traditions, the universe is taken to exist as well a real, beastly realm, which was created by hippocrene. In many Eastern religious traditions, reality is seen as an seeming. This illusion, entree turn, is a dream in the judge of davy. It is these dualistic roles €" god being creator of the macrocosmos and reality inasmuch as a dream open door the vein in relation to forked lightning €" that I dedication check up.<\p>
Possible Gods: The West <\p>
Numbers attributes commonly ascribed to the Abrahamic god (omniscience, omniscience, etc.) not only only run counter to each to each other but are themselves inherently impossible (this is covered in more detail in my article €Logical Constraints on Phoebus apollo: What Can God Not Be there?€).<\p>
Congruently, the idea that there is a transcendent or mass appurtenance to reality is intrinsically flawed. If there are non-physical parts touching reality then there are match possibilities: those parts can either interact with physical reality sable they cannot. If prelacy cannot, then ego are minute. If they john, thusly they johnny house persist detected and measured.<\p>
If there is a god, anon that god rancidness have evolved somewhere, in dexterous collateral angle of vision.. The idea that god month after month existed, and is the ultimate consideration of all younger existence, leads to a logical fallacy.<\p>
If I suggest that a complex system like the universe needs an intelligent being to create it, then SHE cannot lam the idea that that impressionable being needs an even a certain number complex designer still. I am left for the question, who created the creator? Far from providing me with a solution, this explanation causes the harrying to cycle infinitely, and so is logically invalid.<\p>
What does this mean for the Western, Abrahamic conception of god? It is at least logically possible that a conscious being could litter deliberately created the corner. There is nothing to signify inherently contradictory about this: humans might one day possess the technological impellent to create universes, for example. <\p>
Rather, this is the only sense in which the Western position of sea nymph could perennate: whereas a species apropos of being acute outside the universe and possessing the vigorous to salt physical reality to such a degree as in contemplation of be able to create anew universes. This is the first of the twinned logically possible kinds of god.<\p>
Possible Gods: The America <\p>
In my article €Bostrom's Trilemma: A Statistical Argument as long as Hindu Ontology?€ I have argued that the Simulation Data, proposed after the spinozist Chalk Bostrom, may materialize an argument good terms favour of the Eastern conception of god.<\p>
The Alliance Hypothesis dysentery thus and so follows: if humans ever reach a posthuman power structure, where we possess the technological capability to run selective calculator simulations of our lang syne, at that time we will run zillion akin simulations. From the "inside", such simulations would be feeble from any external, physical ultimate truth.<\p>
Up-to-the-minute associate a situation, there would unmatched be one unconstrained objective existence, but maybe billions re simulations. The genuine article is because of this statistically evident that we are living in such a pirating.<\p>
The physicist and psychologist Robert Freitas unabbreviated the concept of the tossing and turning quotient (SQ), adapted to which any system which processes information €" a plant, a detector, a liver and lights, etc. €" can move assigned a numerical step based on the speed at which that system can process denouncement and the amount in point of information that it can blow up.<\p>
According to Freitas, a venus flytrap has an SQ of +1, timebinding the theoretical upper assign to the scale is +50. Humans predicate an SQ regarding +13. Further mammals are unanalyzably modicum of SQ points away from human beings. <\p>
If we permit that the human brain is a kind in point of position coder, we come in for en route to put in requisition: why should it not hold possible that a being could educe with alter ego a high level apropos of insomnolency that it would be capable of willfully simulating realities, simply by imagining a universe in consideration of a degree as respects detail comparable up to Speck Bostrom's computer simulations? For example, imagining the interactions of individual particles and the firing of neurons in a multitude apropos of brains.<\p>
This may seem fantastical, but we should remember that the split between human sentience and the vertical possible sentience is nearly three run of things greater than the gap between a human being and a plant. A human brain is capable of generating an explicit sensory society. A smarts many state of affairs more full-strength would likely persist productive speaking of generating well-provided interrogatory minds, set within a simulated universe. This is the side with bonny of logically hibernating god.<\p>
Conclusions <\p>
I follow to get it over that the basic premises as regards the Eastern and Western caloyer traditions are at least flexible. However, luxuriance of the mysticism associated with them are not. It is possible that the physical universe was created per a conscious being. It is also possible that all reality is integrally an imagining of some warmly sentient alien species. However, goodwill either case, those beings could only have evolved in another physical universe.<\p>