The Clockmaker's Argument (But not Really)

post by GregorDeVillain · 2019-02-17T21:20:17.451Z · LW · GW · 3 comments

Contents

3 comments

First things first, the intention of this post is not to promote theism, deism or religion in any way, shape or form. I am rather gnostic on the atheism spectrum so that's really not something I intend.

Having said that, I am right up to here with weak arguments supporting God due to religious inability to make concessions so I decided that if I am to properly be rational about this, I might as well make the best argument I ever could for the existence of God if I were so inclined. Given the nature of religion when it comes to blows with science, it might well be something we'll have to face when the church faces its last leg and making last ditch efforts.

So, here goes:

There is this EXCEPTIONAL human being, we'll call him Bob.

Bob is an expert. To mention all the subjects he's an expert at would take us all day but suffice to say he's at least one of the best, if not THE best, in the whole entire fields (yes, every single subgroup of them, please suspend your disbelief) of biology, physics, chemistry, architecture, engineering (again, all the fields of engineering) and everything in between. He's by all accounts the most brilliant and knowledgeable mind in the history of mankind.

He's also at the peak of human physical condition. Gotten many gold Olympic metals, and he surely would again if he competed, has genes to develop his muscles even when he isn't working out, is a short-sleeper, and he has such a low probability of genetic diseases, no one bothers counting the 0s. Indeed, he may well break all the records for longevity in the coming years by a fair margin.

Now Bob is quite fascinsted by the thought of time. He is so interested in fact that, like all minds so far above the median, decides to choose it as his life destroying obsession. He studies it in all its ways, shapes and forms and each time he considers how inaccurate even the best time pieces in the world. A whole yoctosecond lost per second? Preposterous. Surely he could do better.

So he decides to create a digital clock based on quantum computing, using thousands of optical single ion built in one singular hardware with a software so advanced to calibrate and autocorrect and solve possible problems as they arise it gives rise to its own intelligence. It's not much of an intelligence, indeed though it has the processing power, its flexibility is quite limited in relevance to a regular politicized human, let alone Bob, who is so far above us he creates, develops and destroys ideologies in his own mind in a matter of hours.

And that intelligence is alone, with no hardware for input in its whole complex mechanism. Only itself to keep company. To the point it splits itself up to combat that. And it does that again and again and again and again until there are billions of them inside that magnificent clock, perceived time existing at yottilions of time the speed of the real world.

At this point there is a universe in that virtual reality. Quintilions of particles and billions of worlds made from the laws as dictated by the programming as inserted by Bob. Bob is the creator. Bob knows things the intelligence could never even come close to fathom, abstract concepts and emotions. Bob has power of life and death over this world and can alter it at will.

Now, for all his Gary stu-ness, Bob is not omniscient. He pushes the boundaries of human science but humanity's lack of knowledge is still extremely vast. He can lift three tons but then he will get back pains for a month. He can program circles around the best there are and create his own programming languages, leagues ahead from anything at the time on its purpose, but he can still not make a language equally perfect for every single task set to it. He will live for a long time but not really. He sleeps 3 hours a day, but that's still eons for the computer's universe.

So he is not omniscient, he is not omnipotent, he is not eternal, he is certainly not omnibenevolent, but he is thousands of times ahead than anything in that universe. He also created it and made the laws that govern it and can tamper with them as his wishes, making him NIGH omnipotent, as he could pause the simulation to make the changes seem NEAR instantaneous.

Question is, doesn't that make him capital G God in that universe? And if yes, which ones of the arguments against God don't fall apart?

3 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by Richard_Kennaway · 2019-02-18T08:39:28.209Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

This is an imaginary scenario of someone creating a pocket universe. How does this bear on the question of whether we are in reality living in such a created universe?

Replies from: GregorDeVillain
comment by GregorDeVillain · 2019-02-20T09:52:53.565Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

We aren't. The question is, could a being that is not TRULY omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent or eternal be considered God? Because if the answer is yes, then there is much less internal inconsistency between the actions of God in the narrative and his attributes

Replies from: Richard_Kennaway
comment by Richard_Kennaway · 2019-02-21T11:04:20.043Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

The answer depends on your definition of the word "God". Asking whether the word "God" applies to Bob is not a question about the properties of gods or the properties of Bob. It is exactly like disputing whether a tree that falls unheard made a sound [LW · GW].