3 ms·

The designer is not assumed. I am it. I design formal systems. Formal systems are human inventions. Any expression or description of the “laws of thought” are

by ukj 5y ago

The designer is not assumed. I am it. I design formal systems. Formal systems are human inventions. Any expression or description of the “laws of thought” are subject to the limits of self-expression and the expressive power of your formal language. The “laws of thought” are rules of thumb. Useful Heuristics - not universal authorities. I recommend Luciano Floridi’s recent work in “The Logic of information: Philosophy as conceptual design.” https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/the-logic-of-information-a-theory-of-philosophy-as-conceptual-design/ https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/the-logic-of-information-a-theor...

User23 5y ago
Does the universe have a designer then? It’s a pretty bold metaphysical assumption that the universe is undesigned and purposeless, but it somehow gave rise to an environment where intelligent beings can design formal systems that accurately describe the design of a system with no designer. This is part of the appeal of the simulationist philosophy, it allows intelligent design, but without the assumptions of monotheism. Naturally like everything else in this space it in turn introduces new difficulties.
- techbrobane 5y ago
  > It’s a pretty bold metaphysical assumption that the universe is undesigned and purposeless Nah, IMO it's much more "bold" to assume that the universe is designed and has a purpose.
- ukj 5y ago
  None of our formal systems “accurately describe the design”. They all have domains of applicability - operational parameters. The appeal of the simulation hypothesis is that IF our formalisms could actually explain all of reality THEN it follows by logical implication that reality can be simulated. This logical implication is true because formal languages are Turing-recognizable. You can “explain” a formalism to a computer. You can program the computer with the Theory of Everything therefore universe can be run on a computer. This is ALL in the abstract. Unfortunately humans have the propensity to commit the mind-projection fallacy.

by ukj 5y ago

User23 5y ago

Does the universe have a designer then? It’s a pretty bold metaphysical assumption that the universe is undesigned and purposeless, but it somehow gave rise to an environment where intelligent beings can design formal systems that accurately describe the design of a system with no designer. This is part of the appeal of the simulationist philosophy, it allows intelligent design, but without the assumptions of monotheism. Naturally like everything else in this space it in turn introduces new difficulties.

techbrobane 5y ago
> It’s a pretty bold metaphysical assumption that the universe is undesigned and purposeless Nah, IMO it's much more "bold" to assume that the universe is designed and has a purpose.
ukj 5y ago
None of our formal systems “accurately describe the design”. They all have domains of applicability - operational parameters. The appeal of the simulation hypothesis is that IF our formalisms could actually explain all of reality THEN it follows by logical implication that reality can be simulated. This logical implication is true because formal languages are Turing-recognizable. You can “explain” a formalism to a computer. You can program the computer with the Theory of Everything therefore universe can be run on a computer. This is ALL in the abstract. Unfortunately humans have the propensity to commit the mind-projection fallacy.