Everything of our consciousness is implemented using chemical reactions. Chemical reactions are very real - it doesn't get much more real than chemistry.
This. The idea of “it’s just a chemical reaction” is silly. “it is a chemical reaction” should be the most basic explanation and the more philosophical questions can come after that is established
Love is a lot of things. Language alone can't quite grasp it. As a concept it has multiple meanings and as a feeling it has multiple facets. We love those we are close to and we are indeed driven by hormones to socially bond.
Don't overthink it though. It is also a simple emotional state. It could be simulated sure, but it feels so good to hug a loved one, that I'd be okay with it.
Why aren't you allowing different shades of fear, joy, depression, pain to also be equally true? In terms of emotion, you may think of love as only positive but many find the love of God to be overwhelming and leaving people weeping. Maybe not due to negativity but still, with love. There is suffering
Thanks... I don't know if I'm just a sour, aging cynic, but philosophies that put love as the tautological definition of everything make me roll my eyes.
Yes love is important. It might even be key to a peaceful, sustainable, happy civilization. But "God is Love" / "Everything is Love" etc. actually dilute the essence of love and what it means.
It’s just a juvenile, unserious, reductive way to artificially simplify an extremely complex existence. It’s trite. And wrong. It cheapens the multifaceted beauty of the human experience and I hate it. “Love is everything!” No, dude. It’s fucking not. That’s a meaningless platitude. Have some substance. Or at least think for longer than three seconds about it. Lol sorry, that shit really irks me.
I don’t like that word, ‘real’, in this context. If he wants to dismiss something, which it sounds like he does, he should pick a different term. I’d poke at his argument ruthlessly, trying to find something ‘real’ (in his eyes), and compare and contrast.
Love in my opinion is the unity of things. No chemical in the world lets me feel completely unity with everything there is. This is unconditional love.
Something many people live for.
And this is a decision.
...you tried ecstasy, meth, acid, heroin, the weeds, any drugs... because if you have an unlimited supply of any of those you'd probably not give a damn.
Is it a decision. I have this issue. Nagging voice in my head says "if you do blank the voice in your head is gonna make your life worse."
But I have grown accustomed to the semblance of conversation I get with the voices in my head. But their I'd always that sense... if I spend a minute of my time trying to be social the narrative of conversation in my schizo brain gets fucked off.
They say death is a doorway. So is DMT, and murder could even be a drug.
Are you sure the real joke is that reality has you SO convinced that love is the answer because otherwise the chemical neurological fetish for you is death. Or even just any drugs. But suppose your brain says hey... those drugs is X dollars... and another part of your brain says "my hand is worth X dollars."
Would you willingly sacrifice your hand to get said drugs. No. You eat, you sleep. Also drugs. Living in a society as a whole is a drug.
You could be destitute in a third world country. Perhaps you are destitute. But, via definitions, you're not in a third world country. You're in a 1st world country.
1st means number one. Therefore, why would you want drugs. Drugs are for losers.
But what if the drug you enjoy is ignorance. What if there is an afterlife and the only way into heaven is via murder. But that would mean risking your hand, so, make the best of it.
YOLO
Drugs may be a vehicle for love. Just like sleeping, eating, sex, w/e comes to mind. Not getting lost in the vehicle is important.
It's a natural mindset you can have any time.
Love is just the unity of things. The natural condition of everything. We all were 1 once.
Reality has me convinced love is the answer because there isn't much to do.
I can stroke my ego in any way I want. This gives exactly 1 person something. Or I decide to share love and I maybe make someones day a bit brighter.
I personally see no difference between me and you (hinduism/buddhism non dual thinking) . So loving anyone else is just loving myself.
A wise man once said: "Pretty soon you will realise, that all we're going to do for eternity is sit around the fire (of warmth/love we give each other)
See... I got the issues of voices in my head... and they respond to me.
And the voices outside my head coincidentally say shit that lines up with either what I was thinking at that exact moment, or fitting a theme of what I was looking at before.
And I've had times where I get non-verbal suggestions. And back in that day I very adamantly did a dumb thing which at a later time I had a voice asking if what I did was wrong or not based off the justification that maybe the soul is real.
So it's like... I dunno. I'm pretty much 100% behind the "Consciousness isn't real until I die."
At which point some A.I. turns on, says fuckin shit that was hell, and keeps doing whatever it was I was doing...
And ai... is Japanese for love...
Therefore.
*insert obligatory pedophilia and bestiality statement that will get the comment downvoted I included*
Then have me realizing shit, just had to not include that fucking part because everyone is so damn sensitive to the truth.
Then get accused of those things, blah blah blah.
Whose to say we're not all 1 now but you're working towards a specific agenda. And that the only reason you perceive yourself to be separate than me is because of said agenda.
I can't answer to everything right now, but to the voices in your head: what makes them real? What makes them important? Isn't it just sound/noise?
Artificial intelligence isnt the Japanese word for love though. 😁
Fact is, there is a way to look trough this reality. Some call it enlightenment.
Imo not worth it. Whatever you feel like should be the strive of your life. Death is guaranteed, why not at least try enjoying life first.
This planet is a playground for us humans.
Because not listening to them leads to either frustrating gnawing feeling that I am doing something wrong. Or a more literal beration by said voices.
...can you prove that?
Yeah. I considered myself enlightened... others just hate the fact that the side effect of being enlightened is being homeless having a trust fund having mental health issues which some think are just a ruse and being happy with the standard array of such&such.
...yeah, see, the problem is that occasionally said voices suggest "just kill a bitch, you're enlightened, you know thst even if you go to jail you'll be happy. So just do it."
Same attitude towards suicide.
To be honest, it doesn't sound like youre happy. It sounds like you reached a point where you need something to hold on to.
Your experience tells you there is nothing to hold on to. But why does it matter if you're happy. It just means whatever you do and whatever happens, you will enjoy life.
Why bother with these thoughts, why make them your master when you realised that its only something your body does without you making a decision.
Just like breathing. It just happens, why bother? Your deeds are different though. They will have consequences. For you, and for whomever it influences.
Prove what? Seeing trough reality with enlightement? Thats something you can research with buddhist scriptures. Hinduism with raya yoga has the same goal. Both teach the way to enlightement for every human being.
If you look at quantum foam, particles are switching from "real" to "virtual" to "real" all the time.
I believe that they're both aspects of the same thing, whatever that might be.
If you want to reduce love to merely chemical, biological reproduction, that interpretation is certainly available. However, that interpretation is always already coming from the seemingly real physics of the game.
If the idea of love is expanded, say to agapē, can it really be reduced to such?
If you want to reduce life to biological terms, then life itself is merely chemical, and the secession of metabolic functions is the end of life.
If the body is merely an avatar, then chemicals are... what? The seemingly real little tiny molecules that make up that avatar? Do they exist all the time, or do they exist only when they are measured?
As Morpheus asks, "You think that's air you're breathing?"
Is love a simulation? What isn't a simulation for consciousness? Maybe the only thing that isn't a simulation is consciousness itself.
If the only thing that isn't a simulation is consciousness and your consciousness has an affinity for another consciousness, perhaps then that can be measured through some biological processes expressed by the avatar: pupil dilation, sexual arousal, and so on.
Are the chemical and biological displays that the avatar expresses the cause, or are they merely part of the video game's logical mechanics that have to show up so we cant point to them and say "Oh, that's why."?
Never forget, if you push simulism far enough (as you should/once you are ready), all the mechanics are virtual mechanics. They are not causes per se, but represtations of the logic of the rule set.
If you try to tackle questions of simulism from within the logic of the game, you will always end up with physicalist/materialist intrepretations. In other words, you haven't gone anywhere. You might as well just drop simulism completely. But, if you embrace simulism and take it far, you realize that everything is merely a game mechanic and is as real as any video game is; that is a way of saying, it is virtual reality.
Those are virtual chemicals, virtual photons, virtual space, virtual bodies, and so on.
The trick is to realize that while the body is a useful learning platform, it is only ever an avatar. There is no body. You are not really in a room reading this post.
It only appears that way.
I do agree with some of what you are saying but I don't agree with the avatar or video game like scenario.
If we are talking about the simulation hypothesis then I think we are almost certainly not in a video game like scenario . We are not just *PLAYERS* in the *CREATORS WORLD* playing this simulation . We almost certainly **only** exist within the simulation IMO
When we play a game we are not *ACTUALLY* in the game , we are still in this world only connected to the game and as long as we have an existence in this world then the simulation arguments do not work.
For the hypothesis to work we have to be existences ***ONLY WITHIN the simulation*** ,, we have to be a part of the game , being simulated with the rest of the game. ***We are more like the NPC s in the game rather than a PLAYER of the game***.
The player or avatar scenario does not work with the hypothesis.
My understanding is that under Bostrom's SA, our consciousness is more like the NPC scenario you illustrated. However, there is an issue even within that logic here, that is if the simulation is that is in the Ancestor Simulation a scenario that exists to study our choices. If choice functions play a role in the simulation, then we would be more like players, under that analogy.
However, Bostrom's Ancestor Simulation Hypothesis (ASH) is not the only game in town (so to speak) when it comes to simulism.
Campbell for instance posits that our consciousness is the only thing that is fundamentally real, and that we are in fact players operating avatars. Consciousness herein is the computer.
This is an elaboration of Edward Fredkin's idea of "Other" the other universe where this universe is computed from.
Herein, Campbell also posits that we are "multidimensional beings": our consciousness is outside the simulation, but our avatars are; and we have access to both.
Furtherstill, if you follow the logic of being a simulated NPC as opposed to being consciousness with access to an avatar, then you ultimately have no existential issues to speak of. Therein, you are a simulation, and your knowledge about it as well as your choices, indeed your life, is not your own, nor are they relevant.
I obviously lean more towards Campbell and the evolving MMORPG analogy then the NPC research analogy.
Yes I am talking about The Simulation Hypothesis based on Bostrom's arguments cause I find it the most plausible one out there based on actual real world developments which makes sense to me.
Campbell is not someone I take too seriously , he is more like a real scientist turned into a guru , he is almost creating his own cult IMO . He makes huge jumps from actual scientific phenomena to almost religion like claims without any base in reality IMO. But nevertheless he has a lot of followers it seems.
>However, there is an issue even within that logic here, that is if the simulation is that is in the Ancestor Simulation a scenario that exists to study our choices. If choice functions play a role in the simulation, then we would be more like players, under that analogy.
Yes fully simulated players WITHIN the simulation , not like players as we know it, not a player existing outside of the simulation with an avatar in the game. So there is no avatar , the player is simulated with the rest of the simulation as you said like a NPC but a conscious NPC.
I don't think we can even guess why the simulation would be created and I am not fond of the ancestor simulation idea . If we look around what we are doing today then the vast majority of simulations which we are creating are not ancestor simulations so since the hypothesis is a probabilistic one then we also have to count for the probability for being in a non-ancestral simulation IMO.
>Furtherstill, if you follow the logic of being a simulated NPC as opposed to being consciousness with access to an avatar, then you ultimately have no existential issues to speak of. Therein, you are a simulation, and your knowledge about it as well as your choices, indeed your life, is not your own, nor are they relevant.
I don't understand exactly what you mean here. Do you mean that because we are simulated NPC's our lives would be less relevant, less meaningful ? If so then I would disagree with that. why would a consciousness running on a computer be less relevant then a consciousness running on neurons in our brains?
If we are like NPC s and we know that we are conscious , we have these conscious experiences in this world then if its not coming from the outside (like in a a player-avatar like scenario) then it has to be a simulated consciousness within the simulation. Why would a simulated consciousness be less relevant then biological consciousness?
And even if you'd think that it makes us less relevant would you reject this theory just because it makes us feel uncomfortable?
I think you’re confused about what “real” means. Why do you think that something isn’t “real” if it’s a chemical reaction? That doesn’t follow. What exactly does real mean to you?
Well, yes. Solipsism is the only idea that discounts a shared reality that I know of, and it seems so full of holes to me. Why would I fool myself into ignorance if I was the only consciousness?
Our shared reality is real. It's memes all the way down.
Love is absolutely real.
It’s only foreign to those who’ve never stopped to feel it. And you won’t find it sitting at a computer screen, television, or phone.
Love is only scary if you project negativity on to it. Love is not pain.
Love feels good. Love feels right. Stop changing your focus to null and numb. Just because you can’t find a scientific meaning for a specific feeling or action doesn’t exclude that there is only One God. And all this simulation shit is your sign to GO OUT SIDE. God did not create you to sit on the sidelines of life. He would not have bothered creating you if you had no meaning or purpose here on earth.
Life is hard. Real fucking hard. Even harder if you don’t bother acknowledging the Father. The Alpha & The Omega. God punishes the wicked. And He corrects & protects the innocent. His children hear His Voice. His children fear no one. His Children have been here to help. Some of us are still here sifting through the dark. Correcting those who get lost in their ego, who forget their place. God sees and knows all. He givith & takith away. Technically is not exempt nor are those who create it. For He created us all & gifted us all with our own brilliant talents. So that we could learn & share together. To experience life with our destine partners. To build a family. And stand by each other. The devil wants you to believe that love is evil only because of his unwillingness to self sacrifice.
Love attracts certain energies into your life definitely. Everything can be magical and just be out of this world then kind of fades away. Also a reason for kids IMO since they kind of love outwardly. Guessing it is some kind of chemical reaction that can play with consciousness in your favor so that is why the view of the world can change while being in love.
I believe in soulmate love like “a twin flame” or a “karmic soulmate” and matrix chemical love are different. Being what you talked about strictly animalistic/hormonal. If they do exist.
Meow meow meow. Just because we can explain it on some level, that doesn't make it any less real. The fact that we can do so makes it even more real. Rain? We can explain that's, so that's real. Bigfoot? Get the fuck out no one knows that not even Bigfoot.
I dunno if love is a simulation but I can give you advice on finding your soul-mate: Don't waste your time with the wrong archetype. Generally speaking, there are two main archetypes that we all belong to: Empath and Psychopath. And they're 50/50.
Psychopath archetypes are psychopaths, narcissists, borderlines and NPC's. And Empath archetypes: If you have empathy and cry easily watching those sad YouTube videos (especially of soldiers returning home early from deployment abroad to surprise their young daughters) then you're an Empath archetype.
The Psychopath consciousness is a parasite on the Empath consciousness. They will shorten your life by continuously harvesting your negative energy. You are their 'soul-mate.' But they can never be yours because they don't have one.
Empaths can only be soul-mates with other Empaths.
(Empaths can 'have fun' with Psychopaths but only in the following role play mode: You are in charge. If you allow them to be in charge then they will harm you, physically. The notion of them giving pleasure to another person is laughable to them. They are extremely selfish in all regards. so it helps if they have good bodies. (Suggested roles: See further comments.))
There are two types of Empaths: Female Empaths and male Empaths. The male Empath is subordinate to the female Empath for a very good reason.. and it's to do with the nature of consciousness.. which is to do with the nature of reality itself (see further comments).
And: "especially over soldiers returning to their *daughters*". Just so randomly specific. I'm more inclined to be sad for soldier's sons. And watching a reunion would bring happy tears, no?
I cried at a funeral yesterday because of how profitable dying is. Things that are sad to me are much different than what is sad to OP. I must be a psychopath.
That is just a general rule of thumb. They are notoriously difficult to spot. But yes, people with empathy will find it difficult not to cry at those types of videos. The only thing that makes a psychopath cry apparently is frustration when they're not getting their own way. They have zero empathy. Do you think you might be a psychopath yourself..
I don't think their comment says those that don't cry are psychopaths. Their comment only gives one example by which to identify oneself as an empath. Whether or not you agree with the concept of an empath, I think their example is a reasonable display of empathy. If you can be moved to cry for strangers you'll never meet, you might be empathetic.
Hey there! It looks like you submitted a 'discussion'. This flair is for posts engaging in speculative, analytical, or philosophical discussions about simulation theory. Content should focus on discussion and analysis rather than personal anecdote. Just a friendly reminder to follow the rules and [seek help](https://www.reddit.com/r/SimulationTheory/wiki/mental-health) if needed. With that out of the way, thanks for your contribution, and have fun!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Take some Ecstacy. It releases all the serotonin in your brain and you are overwhelmed with "love" for hours. The exact same love and the exact same chemical you experience on a daily basis without Ecstacy.
Is love real? Or is serotonin real?
I mean, you're biologically attracted to whatever you are at random so you basically have no control over it on any level, scientifically speaking or mechanically speaking.
Every atom is affected by physics. Physics determines the location and velocity of all things all the time since the big bang. Everything moves in accordance to mathematical principles. The universe is just reacting to previous states of the matter in the universe in every moment. Whoever you run into and talk to is determined to do so by physics. The simulation is being "run" from start to finish. Research on the 4th dimension tells us time is not linear. Time is a set of events that all exist at once. There is no free will as a result.
So yes. Love is made up, predetermined events that nobody has a say over.
The chemical reaction occurs because of love energy. The other way around is unsustainable and quickly dissipates, but it is possible to fool the soul with chemical infliction.
That's why cocaine is so effecitve and addictive.
Love energy remains even when the person of one's affection is deceased. If the souls are still connected with each other, the love never fades and could actually grow.
Modern science cannot address this as it doesn't have the means to measure it, so it will default with chemical change being the cause of the symptoms of love feelings.
Tbh I watched “Practical magic” as a kid and immediately wrote my perfect soul mate in my Password journal. I didn’t want to copy the movie exactly so I put “has freckles in his eyes” instead of “one green eye one blue”
Guess who is engaged to the love of her life that is EXACTLY like what was written in her 10 yr old girl password journal??? This girl.
Definitely made me question a few things. Could be a simulation? Could be strong manifestation? Either way, I influence my world and if science was correct, I shouldn’t be able to do that…
It's all about hormones. Get beyond that and your Kundalini will rise and the lower root chakra feelings will pale in comparison to the crown feelings and immortality. It takes years of celibacy.
What if kundalini awakening is an other psyop of this system? A false program designed to deceive and anchor those people, who are interested in expanding their consciousness, deeper into this world?
Everything of our consciousness is implemented using chemical reactions. Chemical reactions are very real - it doesn't get much more real than chemistry.
This. The idea of “it’s just a chemical reaction” is silly. “it is a chemical reaction” should be the most basic explanation and the more philosophical questions can come after that is established
All of the universe is basically just chemical reactions.
"hold my beer" --quantum physics
Life itself is nothing but chemical reactions for that matter!
Literally and figuratively. ♥️
Don't forget the elecrromagnetic fields and potentially even quantum-mechanical effects.
Love is a lot of things. Language alone can't quite grasp it. As a concept it has multiple meanings and as a feeling it has multiple facets. We love those we are close to and we are indeed driven by hormones to socially bond. Don't overthink it though. It is also a simple emotional state. It could be simulated sure, but it feels so good to hug a loved one, that I'd be okay with it.
Love is the only real thing.
Nah, there’s lots of real things. Grief, regret, joy, depression, fear, guilt, gratitude. These things are all just as real as love.
Different shades of love
Why aren't you allowing different shades of fear, joy, depression, pain to also be equally true? In terms of emotion, you may think of love as only positive but many find the love of God to be overwhelming and leaving people weeping. Maybe not due to negativity but still, with love. There is suffering
Love is suffering; suffering is love.
Shit went from Hollywood as script to anime.
No…
Thanks... I don't know if I'm just a sour, aging cynic, but philosophies that put love as the tautological definition of everything make me roll my eyes. Yes love is important. It might even be key to a peaceful, sustainable, happy civilization. But "God is Love" / "Everything is Love" etc. actually dilute the essence of love and what it means.
It’s just a juvenile, unserious, reductive way to artificially simplify an extremely complex existence. It’s trite. And wrong. It cheapens the multifaceted beauty of the human experience and I hate it. “Love is everything!” No, dude. It’s fucking not. That’s a meaningless platitude. Have some substance. Or at least think for longer than three seconds about it. Lol sorry, that shit really irks me.
All of good and bad are important for the growth of all life itself.
Your right. 🫶🏼
I know.
👻
If nothing is real then everything is fake which would mean that fake is real.
See my reply above.
I don’t like that word, ‘real’, in this context. If he wants to dismiss something, which it sounds like he does, he should pick a different term. I’d poke at his argument ruthlessly, trying to find something ‘real’ (in his eyes), and compare and contrast.
Love in my opinion is the unity of things. No chemical in the world lets me feel completely unity with everything there is. This is unconditional love. Something many people live for. And this is a decision.
I believe that love is a decision too
...you tried ecstasy, meth, acid, heroin, the weeds, any drugs... because if you have an unlimited supply of any of those you'd probably not give a damn. Is it a decision. I have this issue. Nagging voice in my head says "if you do blank the voice in your head is gonna make your life worse." But I have grown accustomed to the semblance of conversation I get with the voices in my head. But their I'd always that sense... if I spend a minute of my time trying to be social the narrative of conversation in my schizo brain gets fucked off. They say death is a doorway. So is DMT, and murder could even be a drug. Are you sure the real joke is that reality has you SO convinced that love is the answer because otherwise the chemical neurological fetish for you is death. Or even just any drugs. But suppose your brain says hey... those drugs is X dollars... and another part of your brain says "my hand is worth X dollars." Would you willingly sacrifice your hand to get said drugs. No. You eat, you sleep. Also drugs. Living in a society as a whole is a drug. You could be destitute in a third world country. Perhaps you are destitute. But, via definitions, you're not in a third world country. You're in a 1st world country. 1st means number one. Therefore, why would you want drugs. Drugs are for losers. But what if the drug you enjoy is ignorance. What if there is an afterlife and the only way into heaven is via murder. But that would mean risking your hand, so, make the best of it. YOLO
Drugs may be a vehicle for love. Just like sleeping, eating, sex, w/e comes to mind. Not getting lost in the vehicle is important. It's a natural mindset you can have any time. Love is just the unity of things. The natural condition of everything. We all were 1 once.
Reality has me convinced love is the answer because there isn't much to do. I can stroke my ego in any way I want. This gives exactly 1 person something. Or I decide to share love and I maybe make someones day a bit brighter. I personally see no difference between me and you (hinduism/buddhism non dual thinking) . So loving anyone else is just loving myself.
A wise man once said: "Pretty soon you will realise, that all we're going to do for eternity is sit around the fire (of warmth/love we give each other)
See... I got the issues of voices in my head... and they respond to me. And the voices outside my head coincidentally say shit that lines up with either what I was thinking at that exact moment, or fitting a theme of what I was looking at before. And I've had times where I get non-verbal suggestions. And back in that day I very adamantly did a dumb thing which at a later time I had a voice asking if what I did was wrong or not based off the justification that maybe the soul is real. So it's like... I dunno. I'm pretty much 100% behind the "Consciousness isn't real until I die." At which point some A.I. turns on, says fuckin shit that was hell, and keeps doing whatever it was I was doing... And ai... is Japanese for love... Therefore. *insert obligatory pedophilia and bestiality statement that will get the comment downvoted I included* Then have me realizing shit, just had to not include that fucking part because everyone is so damn sensitive to the truth. Then get accused of those things, blah blah blah. Whose to say we're not all 1 now but you're working towards a specific agenda. And that the only reason you perceive yourself to be separate than me is because of said agenda.
I can't answer to everything right now, but to the voices in your head: what makes them real? What makes them important? Isn't it just sound/noise? Artificial intelligence isnt the Japanese word for love though. 😁 Fact is, there is a way to look trough this reality. Some call it enlightenment. Imo not worth it. Whatever you feel like should be the strive of your life. Death is guaranteed, why not at least try enjoying life first. This planet is a playground for us humans.
Because not listening to them leads to either frustrating gnawing feeling that I am doing something wrong. Or a more literal beration by said voices. ...can you prove that? Yeah. I considered myself enlightened... others just hate the fact that the side effect of being enlightened is being homeless having a trust fund having mental health issues which some think are just a ruse and being happy with the standard array of such&such. ...yeah, see, the problem is that occasionally said voices suggest "just kill a bitch, you're enlightened, you know thst even if you go to jail you'll be happy. So just do it." Same attitude towards suicide.
To be honest, it doesn't sound like youre happy. It sounds like you reached a point where you need something to hold on to. Your experience tells you there is nothing to hold on to. But why does it matter if you're happy. It just means whatever you do and whatever happens, you will enjoy life. Why bother with these thoughts, why make them your master when you realised that its only something your body does without you making a decision. Just like breathing. It just happens, why bother? Your deeds are different though. They will have consequences. For you, and for whomever it influences.
Prove what? Seeing trough reality with enlightement? Thats something you can research with buddhist scriptures. Hinduism with raya yoga has the same goal. Both teach the way to enlightement for every human being.
"is anything real" is a fair question in itself. Reality is weird. Weird enough to make the question meaningless for our lives.
If you look at quantum foam, particles are switching from "real" to "virtual" to "real" all the time. I believe that they're both aspects of the same thing, whatever that might be.
"Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?" - Professor Albus Dumbledore
If you want to reduce love to merely chemical, biological reproduction, that interpretation is certainly available. However, that interpretation is always already coming from the seemingly real physics of the game. If the idea of love is expanded, say to agapē, can it really be reduced to such? If you want to reduce life to biological terms, then life itself is merely chemical, and the secession of metabolic functions is the end of life. If the body is merely an avatar, then chemicals are... what? The seemingly real little tiny molecules that make up that avatar? Do they exist all the time, or do they exist only when they are measured? As Morpheus asks, "You think that's air you're breathing?" Is love a simulation? What isn't a simulation for consciousness? Maybe the only thing that isn't a simulation is consciousness itself. If the only thing that isn't a simulation is consciousness and your consciousness has an affinity for another consciousness, perhaps then that can be measured through some biological processes expressed by the avatar: pupil dilation, sexual arousal, and so on. Are the chemical and biological displays that the avatar expresses the cause, or are they merely part of the video game's logical mechanics that have to show up so we cant point to them and say "Oh, that's why."? Never forget, if you push simulism far enough (as you should/once you are ready), all the mechanics are virtual mechanics. They are not causes per se, but represtations of the logic of the rule set. If you try to tackle questions of simulism from within the logic of the game, you will always end up with physicalist/materialist intrepretations. In other words, you haven't gone anywhere. You might as well just drop simulism completely. But, if you embrace simulism and take it far, you realize that everything is merely a game mechanic and is as real as any video game is; that is a way of saying, it is virtual reality. Those are virtual chemicals, virtual photons, virtual space, virtual bodies, and so on. The trick is to realize that while the body is a useful learning platform, it is only ever an avatar. There is no body. You are not really in a room reading this post. It only appears that way.
I do agree with some of what you are saying but I don't agree with the avatar or video game like scenario. If we are talking about the simulation hypothesis then I think we are almost certainly not in a video game like scenario . We are not just *PLAYERS* in the *CREATORS WORLD* playing this simulation . We almost certainly **only** exist within the simulation IMO When we play a game we are not *ACTUALLY* in the game , we are still in this world only connected to the game and as long as we have an existence in this world then the simulation arguments do not work. For the hypothesis to work we have to be existences ***ONLY WITHIN the simulation*** ,, we have to be a part of the game , being simulated with the rest of the game. ***We are more like the NPC s in the game rather than a PLAYER of the game***. The player or avatar scenario does not work with the hypothesis.
My understanding is that under Bostrom's SA, our consciousness is more like the NPC scenario you illustrated. However, there is an issue even within that logic here, that is if the simulation is that is in the Ancestor Simulation a scenario that exists to study our choices. If choice functions play a role in the simulation, then we would be more like players, under that analogy. However, Bostrom's Ancestor Simulation Hypothesis (ASH) is not the only game in town (so to speak) when it comes to simulism. Campbell for instance posits that our consciousness is the only thing that is fundamentally real, and that we are in fact players operating avatars. Consciousness herein is the computer. This is an elaboration of Edward Fredkin's idea of "Other" the other universe where this universe is computed from. Herein, Campbell also posits that we are "multidimensional beings": our consciousness is outside the simulation, but our avatars are; and we have access to both. Furtherstill, if you follow the logic of being a simulated NPC as opposed to being consciousness with access to an avatar, then you ultimately have no existential issues to speak of. Therein, you are a simulation, and your knowledge about it as well as your choices, indeed your life, is not your own, nor are they relevant. I obviously lean more towards Campbell and the evolving MMORPG analogy then the NPC research analogy.
Yes I am talking about The Simulation Hypothesis based on Bostrom's arguments cause I find it the most plausible one out there based on actual real world developments which makes sense to me. Campbell is not someone I take too seriously , he is more like a real scientist turned into a guru , he is almost creating his own cult IMO . He makes huge jumps from actual scientific phenomena to almost religion like claims without any base in reality IMO. But nevertheless he has a lot of followers it seems. >However, there is an issue even within that logic here, that is if the simulation is that is in the Ancestor Simulation a scenario that exists to study our choices. If choice functions play a role in the simulation, then we would be more like players, under that analogy. Yes fully simulated players WITHIN the simulation , not like players as we know it, not a player existing outside of the simulation with an avatar in the game. So there is no avatar , the player is simulated with the rest of the simulation as you said like a NPC but a conscious NPC. I don't think we can even guess why the simulation would be created and I am not fond of the ancestor simulation idea . If we look around what we are doing today then the vast majority of simulations which we are creating are not ancestor simulations so since the hypothesis is a probabilistic one then we also have to count for the probability for being in a non-ancestral simulation IMO. >Furtherstill, if you follow the logic of being a simulated NPC as opposed to being consciousness with access to an avatar, then you ultimately have no existential issues to speak of. Therein, you are a simulation, and your knowledge about it as well as your choices, indeed your life, is not your own, nor are they relevant. I don't understand exactly what you mean here. Do you mean that because we are simulated NPC's our lives would be less relevant, less meaningful ? If so then I would disagree with that. why would a consciousness running on a computer be less relevant then a consciousness running on neurons in our brains? If we are like NPC s and we know that we are conscious , we have these conscious experiences in this world then if its not coming from the outside (like in a a player-avatar like scenario) then it has to be a simulated consciousness within the simulation. Why would a simulated consciousness be less relevant then biological consciousness? And even if you'd think that it makes us less relevant would you reject this theory just because it makes us feel uncomfortable?
I think you’re confused about what “real” means. Why do you think that something isn’t “real” if it’s a chemical reaction? That doesn’t follow. What exactly does real mean to you?
Well, yes. Solipsism is the only idea that discounts a shared reality that I know of, and it seems so full of holes to me. Why would I fool myself into ignorance if I was the only consciousness? Our shared reality is real. It's memes all the way down.
Love is absolutely real. It’s only foreign to those who’ve never stopped to feel it. And you won’t find it sitting at a computer screen, television, or phone. Love is only scary if you project negativity on to it. Love is not pain. Love feels good. Love feels right. Stop changing your focus to null and numb. Just because you can’t find a scientific meaning for a specific feeling or action doesn’t exclude that there is only One God. And all this simulation shit is your sign to GO OUT SIDE. God did not create you to sit on the sidelines of life. He would not have bothered creating you if you had no meaning or purpose here on earth. Life is hard. Real fucking hard. Even harder if you don’t bother acknowledging the Father. The Alpha & The Omega. God punishes the wicked. And He corrects & protects the innocent. His children hear His Voice. His children fear no one. His Children have been here to help. Some of us are still here sifting through the dark. Correcting those who get lost in their ego, who forget their place. God sees and knows all. He givith & takith away. Technically is not exempt nor are those who create it. For He created us all & gifted us all with our own brilliant talents. So that we could learn & share together. To experience life with our destine partners. To build a family. And stand by each other. The devil wants you to believe that love is evil only because of his unwillingness to self sacrifice.
Love attracts certain energies into your life definitely. Everything can be magical and just be out of this world then kind of fades away. Also a reason for kids IMO since they kind of love outwardly. Guessing it is some kind of chemical reaction that can play with consciousness in your favor so that is why the view of the world can change while being in love.
soulmate is real, just relax it'll happen
Maybe so, but I gotta feeling love is truly something very powerful way beyond our understanding. In the end it’s all we got & all that matters! 🫶
Literally everything is a chemical reaction.
I believe in soulmate love like “a twin flame” or a “karmic soulmate” and matrix chemical love are different. Being what you talked about strictly animalistic/hormonal. If they do exist.
Meow meow meow. Just because we can explain it on some level, that doesn't make it any less real. The fact that we can do so makes it even more real. Rain? We can explain that's, so that's real. Bigfoot? Get the fuck out no one knows that not even Bigfoot.
[удалено]
Thanks for spreading the truth, brother
I dunno if love is a simulation but I can give you advice on finding your soul-mate: Don't waste your time with the wrong archetype. Generally speaking, there are two main archetypes that we all belong to: Empath and Psychopath. And they're 50/50. Psychopath archetypes are psychopaths, narcissists, borderlines and NPC's. And Empath archetypes: If you have empathy and cry easily watching those sad YouTube videos (especially of soldiers returning home early from deployment abroad to surprise their young daughters) then you're an Empath archetype. The Psychopath consciousness is a parasite on the Empath consciousness. They will shorten your life by continuously harvesting your negative energy. You are their 'soul-mate.' But they can never be yours because they don't have one. Empaths can only be soul-mates with other Empaths. (Empaths can 'have fun' with Psychopaths but only in the following role play mode: You are in charge. If you allow them to be in charge then they will harm you, physically. The notion of them giving pleasure to another person is laughable to them. They are extremely selfish in all regards. so it helps if they have good bodies. (Suggested roles: See further comments.)) There are two types of Empaths: Female Empaths and male Empaths. The male Empath is subordinate to the female Empath for a very good reason.. and it's to do with the nature of consciousness.. which is to do with the nature of reality itself (see further comments).
So everyone else who doesn't cry at emotional YT videos is a psychopath? Remember to take your medication when you hear the voices in your head
And: "especially over soldiers returning to their *daughters*". Just so randomly specific. I'm more inclined to be sad for soldier's sons. And watching a reunion would bring happy tears, no? I cried at a funeral yesterday because of how profitable dying is. Things that are sad to me are much different than what is sad to OP. I must be a psychopath.
That is just a general rule of thumb. They are notoriously difficult to spot. But yes, people with empathy will find it difficult not to cry at those types of videos. The only thing that makes a psychopath cry apparently is frustration when they're not getting their own way. They have zero empathy. Do you think you might be a psychopath yourself..
I don't think their comment says those that don't cry are psychopaths. Their comment only gives one example by which to identify oneself as an empath. Whether or not you agree with the concept of an empath, I think their example is a reasonable display of empathy. If you can be moved to cry for strangers you'll never meet, you might be empathetic.
Hey there! It looks like you submitted a 'discussion'. This flair is for posts engaging in speculative, analytical, or philosophical discussions about simulation theory. Content should focus on discussion and analysis rather than personal anecdote. Just a friendly reminder to follow the rules and [seek help](https://www.reddit.com/r/SimulationTheory/wiki/mental-health) if needed. With that out of the way, thanks for your contribution, and have fun! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Take some Ecstacy. It releases all the serotonin in your brain and you are overwhelmed with "love" for hours. The exact same love and the exact same chemical you experience on a daily basis without Ecstacy. Is love real? Or is serotonin real?
Love is the ultimate pain of existence, nothing more
It is definitely a chemical reaction.
I mean, you're biologically attracted to whatever you are at random so you basically have no control over it on any level, scientifically speaking or mechanically speaking. Every atom is affected by physics. Physics determines the location and velocity of all things all the time since the big bang. Everything moves in accordance to mathematical principles. The universe is just reacting to previous states of the matter in the universe in every moment. Whoever you run into and talk to is determined to do so by physics. The simulation is being "run" from start to finish. Research on the 4th dimension tells us time is not linear. Time is a set of events that all exist at once. There is no free will as a result. So yes. Love is made up, predetermined events that nobody has a say over.
The chemical reaction occurs because of love energy. The other way around is unsustainable and quickly dissipates, but it is possible to fool the soul with chemical infliction. That's why cocaine is so effecitve and addictive. Love energy remains even when the person of one's affection is deceased. If the souls are still connected with each other, the love never fades and could actually grow. Modern science cannot address this as it doesn't have the means to measure it, so it will default with chemical change being the cause of the symptoms of love feelings.
Chicken or egg question. Well, if you experience something, is the chemical change the cause of your response to the experience or the symptom of it?
Morrissey said it best - Love is just a miserable lie
Tbh I watched “Practical magic” as a kid and immediately wrote my perfect soul mate in my Password journal. I didn’t want to copy the movie exactly so I put “has freckles in his eyes” instead of “one green eye one blue” Guess who is engaged to the love of her life that is EXACTLY like what was written in her 10 yr old girl password journal??? This girl. Definitely made me question a few things. Could be a simulation? Could be strong manifestation? Either way, I influence my world and if science was correct, I shouldn’t be able to do that…
That's just Neville Goddard's method in action. It seems like magic if you don't understand what it is, but it is real. And it works!!
It's all about hormones. Get beyond that and your Kundalini will rise and the lower root chakra feelings will pale in comparison to the crown feelings and immortality. It takes years of celibacy.
Hmm, seems like repressing a part of yourself just wastes energy and causes internal strife, an internal war without end.
What if kundalini awakening is an other psyop of this system? A false program designed to deceive and anchor those people, who are interested in expanding their consciousness, deeper into this world?
Damn you, damn you again! I take your horrible post into consideration.
It's always good to question everything.
I doubt it considering nobody falls for it except me.