Of course not, but then You didn’t get the wager evil.made and lost. The devil can not deal with underage children, there was no deal in the late middle, ages require maturity, and hence the devil advocate had become immaterial., it was really a test as was the sacrificial foreseeability of Isaac, a simulation as well , as a test, that was sine quo est, to become the necessary irony that had to have been made real from the image simulated. It was written so, that AI could understand what’s at stake, where misunderstanding could bad made all the difference in the world.
Who simulates whom?
There arose a keen sense that the so called ‘naturalistic fallacy’ the one that makes a distinction between the nature of mankind and how mankind should break from the natural setting. This break away, can be interpreted as a matter that for the most part, belongs into that realm of man which concerns the willful exercise of man, or the other version which started evolutionary progression with a higher objective, that which parallels three planes of experience:
1 Those ideal features of behavior, which develop man’s goodness, sense of beauty, and the pursuit of peace
2.The understanding of how the cognative functional equivalents progressed from these ideal presuppositions, into the analogous perception and interpretation their embedded signs into memory functions.
- How these memory functions acted and reacted in a cyclical simulated form, from basic assumptions toward their applicability, and how these probabilistically favored , evolved series , finally identified the primary ( prophetic( assumptions with an ‘ethereal Object’ which was foreshadowed , and finally were interpreted as consisting of an identical structural Entity.
The fact that we have gone through this eschatologicalky sensible process, proves for the most part, that MAN as a creature of Nature, favored and was favored to break away, and become conscious of Who he part takes the ideas, which selectively must adhere to the ideas of how his existence should be, in any case, how it should or could have been.
This life may be merely a slice of the ‘eternal’ Cosmic Pie, and some existences failing, may not be evidentiary of the failure of other civilizations elsewhere. To think otherwise would be myopic and centrist to the same degree as way back when it was thought that the earth was the center of the universe, or the earth was flat.
Now the wager:
The betting on either for or against the existence of God is a pushback into a nominalism which has a rational basis, culminating in either a total, absolute pantheism , or a complete nihilism. Enter Christ Jesus the messenger. He obliterates this doubtful realm , He reaffirms Einstein’s comment that “God doesn’t plague with dice”.
Then the ideologically inclined skeptics, who remain transfixed in this here present reality, will point to all the awful horror that existence burdens mankind with and declare god dead. But isn’t this type of thinking apropos to the very break of what us, what can be proof of the mysteries behind those aspects of evolution which can not be accounted for?It is folly to assume man gas all the answers regarding how that urge to do what should be done developed, from it’s what we denigrate as mythical beginnings, onto the theoretical embedded phenomena
of simulations , which have become carbon copies of an original, where the two can no longer be distinguished?
