testearsmint

testearsmint t1_jbmbfty wrote

That's all fair. I just think of metaphysics as physics potentially not yet realized, and quantum physics has at least put forward the idea of the possibility of extra possibilities beyond things we can currently conceive.

Regarding things that may not be currently falsifiable, I think it depends on the idea. Sometimes the ideas are useless to consider, sometimes we may in time know the truth of them, and some of them are just left in a state of "remains to be seen". In that sense, a lot of that kind of stuff is in the grouping of things I don't necessarily believe in, but are interesting to consider, may be verified in the future, and aren't necessarily worth tossing out straight from the get-go.

−1

testearsmint t1_jbm50nu wrote

I think there are some interesting arguments here and there (fine-tuning's one example). It's interesting to consider because it may have some combination of certain metaphysical implications (mind-body dualism, idealism, afterlife, reincarnation), but it is true that it could be possible that these metaphysics may also exist in a creatorless universe. After all, we've yet to solve such issues as bridging the gap between general relativity and quantum physics, consciousness, etc.

Organized religion, kind of a separate matter, is definitely pretty common for humans, though. Whether for social community or authoritarian inclinations of opportunists.

0

testearsmint t1_jbls6ri wrote

Simulations have a lot to be considered about them, and there's a fair bit of uncertainty there too (the idea of simulated realities simulating realities simulating realities and the probability of us being in one versus the question of whether simulating an entire universe (or even a galaxy) would require an entire universe/galaxy anyway and thus one wonders what difference it would make/could it even continue ad infinitum).

Regarding God, it's more of an idea before even getting to/outside of any big religion in particular. Is the universe/multiverse causeless or is there a being that created it that's causeless? That's where the question lies, and where I don't really know what to believe in either direction.

−1

testearsmint t1_jblm8ry wrote

It's all very interesting. I wonder, too if quantum physics is God's way of preventing determinism/predictability and enshrining free will. This is of course under theistic models, though. I'm an agnostic currently.

−1

testearsmint t1_jblhgyx wrote

There's very interesting work in this regard. Roger Penrose put forward a theory and, after criticism, a defense of his theory that our minds are a sort of quantum computer. I haven't looked too far into it personally, but as much as we can and should always maintain initial skepticism, there may be some validity there since the guy is a complete genius and literally won a Noble Prize as recently as two years ago.

Again, it's kind of an appeal to authority fallacy so it doesn't mean he's immediately right. I just like to think of it in the same sense of when I consider people like Aristotle, etc. of like, "Well, that person's pretty fucking smart, maybe there was something there".

2

testearsmint t1_jblgjom wrote

The Cartesian approach is always very interesting in this regard. Consciousness implies at least some kind of self.

Out of curiosity:

  1. In this case, do you believe consciousness encompasses the entirety of the person, as in the "I" that we can most certainly believe to exist (the one that sees, experiences, feels, etc.) is the same as the one that moves, acts, speaks, etc. and thus there is only one "self"?

  2. As a follow-up, what do you think our existence consists of? Non-reductive physicalism, mind-body dualism, idealism, something else?

9