“Or were they created by nothing, or are they ˹their own˺ creators?” (Qur’an 52:35)
It seems that the Atheism community has of late retreated to two basic positions.
- That the Universe comes from nothing.
- That we (creation) have created other creations.
Both of these positions are highly problematic from every conceivable angle.
Let us first deal with proposition number 2. We as a creation have been created by other creations.
ARE THEY THEIR OWN CREATORS?
@2:34 “The odds we are in base reality is one in billions. Tell me what’s wrong with that argument?” The questioner from the audience persist: Is the answer yes? Elon Musk answers: “Probably. Is there a flaw in that argument?”
@:3:10 “Arguably we should hope that that’s true. Because otherwise if civilization stops advancing then that maybe do to some calamitist (word?) event that erases civilization. So maybe we should be hopeful that this is a simulation cause otherwise.” (interrupted by co-host) – “because they could reboot it.” he offers.
Elon continues with is thought…. “Either we are going to create simulations that are indistinguishable from reality or civilization will cease to exist.” “Those are the two options.”
#1) The Math: How did Elon Musk come to the conclusion that it is one in billions and not one in millions or one in trillions?
#2) The Question of Evil is unresolved or in Elon’s worldview there really is no evil at all. We are in a simulation rather it’s a video game for cheap thrills, or some advanced scientific research; constructs are created that have the understanding that they some how have real feelings and real lives and their lives have real meaning.
In Elon Musk worldview there is a 1 in one billion chance that he is actually intelligent, actually has feelings, and actually loves Amber Heard. A 1 in a billon chance that he is actually a self motivated self driven person. However, the odds are against that. In Elon’s worldview he is simply written that way. Which brings us to the issue of free will and and fatalism. More on that in a moment.
Now this is not an argument against Elon’s simulation worldview; however, it does make atheist arguments against the problem of evil backfire. What does Samuel Haris say about Elon’s view that the perceived atrocities of srebrenica and the holocaust are all a simulation?
Which things brings to a very crucial point that anyone reading this needs to ponder. Does advancement in technology mean a more compassionate worldview? A more compassionate society? After all we are now talking about a civilization that create simulations were beings are raped, molested, burned alive and have countless horrors inflicted upon them. Does this civilization learn in real time? You would have to assume so. Which argues that our simulation is more akin to a video game than to some massive scientific understanding for observation and data collecting. Why? Because how many times do you need to murder to get the achieved and desired scientific data?
It’s little wonder that Elon Musk doesn’t have that spark in his eyes as someone who is truly alive. To me the man looks massively depressed and this is the outcome of his worldview.
Now on to Free Will and Fatalism.
As mentioned in Elon’s worldview there is a 1 billion chance that he is actually intelligent, has actual feelings, actually loves someone and /or is a self driven person. However, the odds are against that.
The thought that Elon didn’t complete:
“Arguably we should hope that that’s true. Because otherwise if civilization stops advancing then that maybe do to some calamitist (word?) event that erases civilization. So maybe we should be hopeful that this is a simulation cause otherwise.”
Here Elon reveals his fear. Civilization must should continue. So it is best to hope that this is a simulation because he reasons that this civilization has managed to find ways to cheat otherwise cataclysmic events.
Which begs the question how does he not know that a cataclysmic event hasn’t already happened to said civilization and we are simply a running program on some outpost that will last as long as said generator continues to run.
Yet, this worldview with all it’s speculation and and hype and ultimately the depression that it brings doesn’t answer the question: Who created those who put us in the simulation?
OR WERE THEY CREATED BY NOTHING?
The interesting thing about the concept of nothing is that it is an abstract concept that we human beings understand but cannot grasp. Rather or not we are in a simulation or not we simply cannot imagine, conceptualize, visualize nothingness.
We understand the concept of nothing. Nothing simply means the absence of absolutely anything. If you were to close your mind and try and conceptualize or visualize nothing it is an impossibility. We will always posit something, rather it is a clear black space or a clear white space, something akin to an empty room. Yet, there it is the black space, the white space, the empty room, there is always something rather than nothing.
The comments about this book can be best summarized by an Amazon review which I will place here:
“The author, an ardent materialist, fails to deliver on his promise to the reader. His ‘reason’ simply boils down to “eternal quantum-fluctuations” did it (the common evolution-of-the-gaps idea).
Experimental observation of the initial ‘Big Bang’ event and the cascade of subsequent hypothesised events such as cosmic inflation [a miraculous “negative false vacuum energy” on a universal scale], star formation [from the self-collapsing hydrogen gas clouds], galaxy formations [no explanation given] etc., are non-existent.
For example, on p. 17: “we can extrapolate…when the universe was about one second old…all observed matter was compressed in a dense plasma whose temperature should have been 10 billion degrees”. This is a modern creation myth having nothing to do with the scientific method.
By faith he assumes many things, e.g., that the universe has no edge and is homogeneous from every location and in every direction. Further, space is somehow ‘endowed’ with energy for the ‘free lunch’ to create everything, but the begged-question of who this mysterious endower is left off.
The faith of other devoted atheists in the power of ‘nothing’ to create everything will find little nourishment in this book.
A single star for some historical and scientific educational value the reader can salvage.”
Or just look at the way some physicist try to explain the question we have all had. “What is the universe expanding into?” https://phys.org/news/2013-11-universe.html
Look where they say:
“A better analogy is the surface of an expanding balloon. Not the 3 dimensional balloon, just its 2 dimensional surface. If you were an ant crawling around the surface of a huge balloon, and the balloon was your whole universe, you would see the balloon as essentially flat under your feet.”
“Imagine the balloon is inflating. In every direction you look, other ants are moving away from you. The further they are, the faster away they’re moving. Even though it feels like a flat surface, walk in any direction long enough and you’d return to your starting point.”
However, we know the balloon is inflating into the available space around it. No available space no inflation.
All of these alternative theories… that we are a simulation -but what created those who created the simulation?
A universe out of ‘almost’ nothing, but what created these “eternal quantum fluctuations” why posit an eternal quantum fluctuations and yet this is not allowed for Allah to be eternal?
Islam offers two things.
- A meaningful existence.
- A cogent argument for the existence of the Creator.
Say Allah is One
Independent of all things, though all things are dependent upon him.
He does not bring forth like kind and he did not come forth from like kind.
There is nothing like unto this Oneness. (Qur’an 112:1-4)