Photo by Erkan Arda Abaci on Scop.io
I have a bunch of ideas that have been circulating in my head for a while now, and I have been trying to find some time to write them all down. However, I've been so busy, I just haven't had the time to write about it all. Then my cousin recently told me about this voice to text app that can make things a whole lot easier to get my ideas down on paper, so I've decided to give it a try for the near future. That means that for the foreseeable future, my blog articles are probably going to have a different sort of tone to them, since I'm actually talking them out instead of writing them out. But hopefully that allows me to get more blogs out there since I have taken a hiatus due to our busyness.
I have a bunch of ideas that have been circulating in my head for a while now, and I have been trying to find some time to write them all down. However, I've been so busy, I just haven't had the time to write about it all. Then my cousin recently told me about this voice to text app that can make things a whole lot easier to get my ideas down on paper, so I've decided to give it a try for the near future. That means that for the foreseeable future, my blog articles are probably going to have a different sort of tone to them, since I'm actually talking them out instead of writing them out. But hopefully that allows me to get more blogs out there since I have taken a hiatus due to our busyness.
The multiverse is something which has fascinated me for a long time. I love all of those movies about multiverses and time travel and all of the the cerebral sorts of things that go on in these stories. I feel like a lot of times the multiverse is extremely speculative, and speculation often allows ample room for creativity. In the real world, though, I often times feel like the multiverse is a cheap cop out to avoid some of the implications of the Divine. Nevertheless, it's absolutely fascinating. So I was thinking about the multiverse the other day, and I had this realization, which I don't know if it's a new realization in the realm of thinking about the multiverse or if it's probably some really obvious thing that that all the nerds out there know, but it was a revelation for me. There have been a lot of times where I'll be thinking like, man, if there's a multiverse, then there is a me who has lived the exact same life up to this point. But instead of having their hands at 90 degrees right now, they have their hand at 90.01 degrees. And then there's another multiverse where all of the exact same things have happened, but the other me has their hand at 90.0101 degrees, right and you can go on for infinity in regard to all of the variations just of like how my hand is placed, but then you can get into fingers and eyes and and then you can have all of my past was different and I mean, there are an infinity of infinities in regard to possibilities for a multiverse. But then I had this revelation. I recognize that if all of these infinite possibilities existed, then there were actually worlds in which all lots of possibilities have actually happened.
So my mind immediately went to the short Sherlock Holmes series. Surely, in a multiverse, there is a world in which in the 19th century, a child was born in named Sherlock Holmes. Now, in some multiverses, he might have become a butcher or he might have become an engineer or who knows what else. But in some universes that Sherlock Holmes actually became a private detective. And then there were other multiverses in which this villain Moriarty came on the scene. And he existed in his own worlds in infinite amount of his own worlds. But then there were some worlds where Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty existed together. And some of these multiverses Sherlock Holmes caught Moriarty, in some of them he didn't, and in some of them their paths didn't even cross. And then in some multiverses, Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty, their stories actually played out exactly as was written in the Sherlock Holmes series, perhaps just one book. But then another multiverses maybe there were two books that aligned two of their interactions. And then there are some multiverses, in which every single word of the Sherlock Holmes series was exactly as it was written, verbatim, all of the conversations, everything. And there aren't some worlds like that, but there are an infinite amount of worlds in which the Sherlock Holmes series actually took place.
Likewise, any fiction book that you can think of which doesn't include logical impossibilities, you know, things that just absolutely can't happen, like magic or anti-scientific laws and things that that can't possibly exist. Every fiction book has a corollary world in which it actually exists, and not just one world, but an infinite amount of worlds where that takes place. And even some more Magicy sorts of books might possibly have their existences you know, in some magic books where you have simple magic like calling a curse upon somebody and they die. Which we might say doesn't happen. But in some multiverses, coincidence could happen in that world where every time somebody called a curse upon somebody, that person died, and it wasn't causative, but it just so happened that in that world, all of the people cursed coincidentally died. Of course, that's statistically, like impossible. But when you have an infinite amount of worlds, then that world is going to exist an infinite amount of times. And you can think of other sorts of magic that you can come up with a naturalistic explanation for happening. You know, there's certain things popping into existence or out of existence, which are phenomena that happens so rarely and only on a really small, small scale. But you can imagine that there's a world where, where certain sorts of Magic could appear to exist.
Now this doesn't seem to have all that much to do with theology, per se, but I would say that there's one significant application here. Alvin Plantinga, has a really famous argument. I think it's called the evolutionary argument against naturalism or something to that extent, where he essentially argues that look, evolution doesn't select for truthfulness, it selects for survival. Therefore, whatever it is that causes you to survive, it should give you no confidence that that you're going to see the truth. I mean, there are lots of examples of things that are truthful that can be damaging. I mean, thinking about the freewill issue, it might be more beneficial for our species to survive if we think we had free will even if it didn't exist. So there are all these useful fictions that happen in nature. And all of these, these things that we perceive as truths, which evolution is not selected for, because it selected for survival and not truth. And so Plantinga, his point is just that a lot of atheists and scientists like to pride themselves on this search for truth. But on a naturalistic system, truth should be very suspect. Our ability to come to truth should be something that we question strongly.
I think if you if you look at the multiverse and think of all of the possibilities, you know, in a multiverse that exists in an infinite amount of multiverses, there has to be these things that are logical or that are seeming impossibilities statistically, but would actually be the norm. Statistics would be turned on its head in some worlds, and not just some worlds, but an infinite amount of worlds. And you would think certain things are causation when really, they're not because you're just getting all of the coincidences in that world and those infinite amounts of words. And so something like truth and our ability to know comes into question with the existence of multiverses.
Likewise, any fiction book that you can think of which doesn't include logical impossibilities, you know, things that just absolutely can't happen, like magic or anti-scientific laws and things that that can't possibly exist. Every fiction book has a corollary world in which it actually exists, and not just one world, but an infinite amount of worlds where that takes place. And even some more Magicy sorts of books might possibly have their existences you know, in some magic books where you have simple magic like calling a curse upon somebody and they die. Which we might say doesn't happen. But in some multiverses, coincidence could happen in that world where every time somebody called a curse upon somebody, that person died, and it wasn't causative, but it just so happened that in that world, all of the people cursed coincidentally died. Of course, that's statistically, like impossible. But when you have an infinite amount of worlds, then that world is going to exist an infinite amount of times. And you can think of other sorts of magic that you can come up with a naturalistic explanation for happening. You know, there's certain things popping into existence or out of existence, which are phenomena that happens so rarely and only on a really small, small scale. But you can imagine that there's a world where, where certain sorts of Magic could appear to exist.
Now this doesn't seem to have all that much to do with theology, per se, but I would say that there's one significant application here. Alvin Plantinga, has a really famous argument. I think it's called the evolutionary argument against naturalism or something to that extent, where he essentially argues that look, evolution doesn't select for truthfulness, it selects for survival. Therefore, whatever it is that causes you to survive, it should give you no confidence that that you're going to see the truth. I mean, there are lots of examples of things that are truthful that can be damaging. I mean, thinking about the freewill issue, it might be more beneficial for our species to survive if we think we had free will even if it didn't exist. So there are all these useful fictions that happen in nature. And all of these, these things that we perceive as truths, which evolution is not selected for, because it selected for survival and not truth. And so Plantinga, his point is just that a lot of atheists and scientists like to pride themselves on this search for truth. But on a naturalistic system, truth should be very suspect. Our ability to come to truth should be something that we question strongly.
I think if you if you look at the multiverse and think of all of the possibilities, you know, in a multiverse that exists in an infinite amount of multiverses, there has to be these things that are logical or that are seeming impossibilities statistically, but would actually be the norm. Statistics would be turned on its head in some worlds, and not just some worlds, but an infinite amount of worlds. And you would think certain things are causation when really, they're not because you're just getting all of the coincidences in that world and those infinite amounts of words. And so something like truth and our ability to know comes into question with the existence of multiverses.
RSS Feed