Reality vs. Simulated Reality/Lies. Truth Part 7
What is Really Real? Why is simulation theory of life gaining traction when it is all made up? Should we correlate gaming with reality?
What is Really Real?
“Thinking something does not make it true. Wanting something does not make it real.”
― Michelle Hodkin, The Unbecoming of Mara Dyer
With objective truths being as close to reality as possible, this leaves everything else subjective. Subjective truths are subject to the human mind and the beliefs we form around them. Subjective truths are the first three layers of truth mentioned below and in this series of articles about truth. Objective truth is separate and remains the outer layer.
Objective truth is also known as “reality.” However, the definition of reality gets clouded, as does truth, when not understood. Reality, too, is frequently seen as a black-and-white issue. Regardless, reality is synonymous with the word Truth. Likewise, all the same explanations about Truth hold true for the layers of reality.
Layer 1. Personal Truth = Perception = Subjective
Layer 2. Political Truth = Herd Approval = Subjective
Layer 3. Universal Truth = Fictions = Subjective
Layer 4. Objective Truth = Unchangeable Truths = Reality
One could apply the dualistic method here and say there are only two types of truths, and they would be right. This dualistic approach is also accurate but is vague and skips the layers of subjective truths:
Subjective Truths = Personal, Political, and Universal Truths
Objective Truth = Reality
Further considerations are how we view Reality.
Subjective Reality = Personal, Political, and Universal Truths
Objective Reality = Unchangeable Truths
Russell’s Teapot
Because truth relies on human language, which humans invented, it can also be untrue. Truth only depends on human mechanisms and self-established rules the herd agrees on. Nonetheless, over time, a definition of truth does emerge from our societies and is written down as a general rule.
And because humans are a part of nature, we can fool ourselves into collectively confirming a bias. For example, as many people want God to exist, it’s impossible to prove. But just like Bertrand Russell proposed the counterargument against religion with his famous Russell’s teapot story, we can’t simply claim something is true and expect others to believe it. For any claim to have traction into the truth mud, it must at least be a testable idea.
Russell’s teapot is a parody religion where he claims there is a teapot orbiting in space somewhere between Earth and Mars. His example shows how absurd it is to claim something without proof while expecting others to try and disprove the radical assertion.
Another example is Carl Sagan’s invisible dragon in his garage or the more recent Invisible Pink Unicorn. Although a person might say they own a pink unicorn and cannot show you, they default with the next claim that you can’t see the pink unicorn because they are invisible. This type of person carries around the “just trust me” attitude. But that’s not how truth of any kind works. That’s simply making shit up.
To help eliminate radical claims from science, Karl Popper took Francis Bacon’s scientific method and added a new rule: “what is claimed must also be falsifiable.” Falsification means that when a person makes a claim, their claim has to be testable. The falsifiable rule immediately recognizes the claims worth pursuing vs. the claims that are simply made up. No longer can a person say they own an invisible pink unicorn because there is no way to falsify–test–the assertion.
Francis Bacon’s Scientific Method
Induction (It all adds up)
Question assumed: I believe all swans are white;
Research method: Verification. Let’s count a few white ones.
Findings:
Swan 1 = White
Swan 2 = White
Swan 3 = White
Conclusion: 3 swans are white. Therefore all swans are white.
Conclusion alternative: Had the last swan been black, then 33% of all swans are always black. No further searching is required. (false assumption)
Karl Popper’s Scientific Method
Deduction (It doesn’t all add up)
Question proposed: Are all swans white?
Research method: Falsification. Let’s search for the hypothetical black one.
Findings:
Swan 1 = White
Swan 2 = White
Swan 3 = Black (found it)
Conclusion: It only takes 1 black swan. Therefore, not all swans are white.
Conclusion alternative: Had no black swans been found, then all swans are considered white until proven otherwise. Continue the research. (reasonable assumption)
Popper’s philosophy of science inspired people like Einstein, Heisenberg, Bohr, and Born. (Caltech) The following big discoveries were possible because of “falsifiability,” rather than “verifiability,” which forces humans to look in other places for objective truths besides the obvious and lazy sectors.
Objective truths are all around us, hidden under this layer of reality. We only have to know how to find them.
The scientific method still requires human senses throughout the whole process. However, Popper’s revised method eliminates confirmation bias, assumptions, and intuition. He also refined the method’s final step, which includes peer review.
Now, if we could only get all modern scientists to remember this and remove ego from the scientific method, we could be further along in advancements and technology.
What the scientific method means for society is we are getting closer to objective truth/reality, one research project at a time.
So I’m sorry to all the Blue and Gold shirt society members. Your blue and gold dress images do not physically exist anywhere except in your minds. And because fictions are only imagined, they can never be claimed as an objective truth.
Simulated Reality
From Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” to René Descartes’ “evil demon” hypothesis. To movies like The Matrix trilogy and The Truman Show. Modern scientists now repeat those portrayed simulated realities and have even formed a so-called “theory” around the idea. This Simulated Theory concept suggests that we live in a simulated reality. As a result of the repetition, this idealistic opinion is gaining popularity in pop culture. But remember, Karl Popper proposed; “to make a claim, it must also be falsifiable.” Further, American Astronomer Carl Sagan once said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
As the idea gets tossed around more and more among the scientific community, they are unintentionally forming a political truth; a group story about everyone living in a simulation. Elon Musk discusses the idea so frequently that he admits the only place he is not allowed to discuss the idea “is in my hottub.” (Video) So the rumors affect influential people with the power and tools to spread misinformation. But with no way to prove such a wild idea, scientists must retract their assertions before this misinformation grows.
But where do people get the notion we live in a simulated reality? Besides those mentioned above, people’s lack of understanding about the layers of truth leaves them with false intuitions about something mysterious taking place in life. But as already mentioned, objective truth requires additional and sometimes complicated steps in thinking, math, and critical thinking.
The learning process toward reality often discourages people from even considering learning about objective truth. Therefore, people step back into the subjective truth layers and dream up new fictions that are romantically easier to understand. As a result, the newly formed political truths about reality have people confusing virtual reality and video games with real life. But can you blame them?
It’s more intriguing and easier to imagine a 14-year-old kid playing a game of LIFE somewhere out there beyond Russell’s teapot. Kind of like imagining someone is controlling everything from outside the universe, looking inward, from beyond the cosmic horizon. Kind of like a god. And there we have a formed religion again, under the guise of a “14-year old kid, just playing a video game called LIFE.”
After all, almost no one wants to imagine a harsh and unfamiliar reality hidden under a layer of mathematical equations and quantum physics.
Scientists and physicists should consider cutting the Simulation Theory out of their conceivable theory conversations. Simulation Theory has not even graduated to “theory” according to the scientific method; it’s hypothetical instead.
This is a series piece 7 of 9. Below is the next article.
Performativity: Speak Into Existence. Truth Part 8 >>
Performativity: Speak Into Existence. Truth Part 8
Exerting Force Into Reality. How do words turn into reality? Learn about how language becomes a force.medium.com
Previous article
<< Scientific Method. Circle of Lies? Truth Part 6
Scientific Method. Circle of Lies? Truth Part 6
Baby Steps to Reality. To understand objective truths, we must first understand the steps that lead us to reality.medium.com
First Article
<<< The Truth About Truth; It’s All a Lie. Truth Part 1
The Truth About Truth; It’s All a Lie. Truth Part 1
Philosophy of Truth & Reality Introduction. What is truth and how is it better understood?medium.com