Story Views
Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

Our Facebook friend Tim Brigham, who teaches college psychology in Florida presented a link to material about Nick Bostrom’s ideas about the Universe (and our existence in it): we (and the Universe) are a computer simulation.

A comparison to Robert Lanza’s view that the Universe is a biocentrism — we are part of a biologic consciousness that transcends what we know as cosmological physics – brought about the “wrath” of a Brigham friend (Martin) who claimed that Lanza’s view was “hogwash” (my interpretation of Martin’s anti-biocentrism).

A short discussion ensued, one that I’d like to extend here, if you’re up to it.

The Bostrom “matrix” argument is succinctly this (from Wikipedia):

“If there were a substantial chance that our civilization will ever get to the posthuman stage and run many ancestor-simulations, then how come you are not living in such a simulation?”

The whole Bostrom scenario can be read here:

Lanza’s views are summed up in this statement (from Wikipedia):

“Biocentrism suggests that life is not an accidental byproduct of physics, but rather is a key part of our understanding of the universe. Biocentrism states that there is no Independent external universe outside of biological existence.”

A more redolent explanation of Robert Lanza’s views can be read here:

Now how does this impact UFOs?

Both arguments put UFOs into a category of unreality, something akin to Zoam Chomsky’s anti-UFO views….akin, but not exactly identical.

UFOs, and everything else, I’m afraid, are chimeras, either of the brain/mind or the result of a computer simulation.

How does one reflect upon such a philosophical conundrum?

Eric Wargo’s thenightshirt.com approaches the matter(s) from an oblique ESP stance.

Kevin Randle’s harpies don’t even come close, arguing Roswell minutiae to the point of insane babbling.

Chris Savia’s The Daily Grail broaches such topics and has a following but mostly of persons ill-equipped to deal with things academically dense.

Readers here are cowed by anything philosophical or literate, and hesitate to comment, generally, in an intellectual way.

Facebookers are so removed from erudition that any topic, like this, is doomed to emojis and “likes” – nothing more.

If we are a computer simulation or if we are a consciousness reflecting on a reality that does not exist outside our biological mentally, what does that do to ufology or the study of UFOs?

UFOs become, as I often remark, a brutally unnecessary addendum to our lives, and to hang our existence on them, even in a infinitely small way, is pathological.

What say you?

RR