It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Logic God Hypothesis

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:22 AM
We exist, 1 = 1.
The fact that we exist, proves that reality can support sentient life.
If reality can support sentient life, and reality has any computational facilities, logically, reality would track, record and obey input from sentient beings, even if reality operating system is simply a logic gate system which should logically be > 50% in favour of survival of sentient life.
Logically, the input of sentient life would suggest that survival is always desirable for the many, thereby reality would logically be tilted over 50% in favour of sentient life.
The fact that we exist suggests that there is such a logic gate system, and is potentially responsive to human input, with an over 50% probability of.
Thereby, the possibility of sentient life being monitored by reality is over 50%, and the possibility of reality trying to respond to sentient beings desires is also over 50%, and the probability of reality favouring the survival of sentient life is also over 50%.
With regards to what my species wants from reality, my sentient species has, for over 100,000 years, prayed for a loving and kind God to be truly omnipotent and look after us.
Thereby, logically, if reality responds to sentient desires, that would be the core desire of my sentient species, and would also be the safest possible omnipotent being.
Love is different to blind obedience.
Thereby logically, we can derive that 1 = 1, 1 + 1 = 2, reality probably responds to sentient input, our sentient input has been that we desire a loving God, were reality to respond to that, loving God would be real, and, logically, truly omnipotent forever no matter what happens.
The logical conclusion is that 1, reality probably has a logic gate system, 2, that logic gate system must be always tiled in favour of survival of many sentient beings, 3, that logic gate system must always respond best to sentient beings, 4, that logic gate system must logically care for and look after God, and ensure God eternally has power, 5, logically, if God desires to share power with man, through such methods as "Project Jedi", "Magic", "psychic powers", and equivalents, that logic gate system must ensure that happens in a happy and safe way for both man and God.

Logically, the simplest, least omniscient, most omnipotent God is a simple logic switch at the end of everything that is either tilted towards life or death.
Happy kind sentient input will tilt that towards life, whereas torture and harm will tilt that towards death.
Logically, when that is tilted towards > 50% life, > 50% listening to forms of life follows, > 50% obeying my species long term directives follows, thereby > 50% loving God becomes a definite probability, and generally we like sharing with those we love.

The question is, where did the logic God come from? Would the logic God even be able to be told? Could he tell me?

God must be more than just a logic gate.

posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 01:02 AM
Isaiah 55:8-9 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Logic gate? Please...

posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 06:17 PM
You talk about reality as if you know what it is. No human being on this earth knows what ultimate reality is, unless that person is "god" they can't know in full and for sure.

How can reality be 50% this and that if you don't know reality in full? How can you put percentages on the unknown?

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 05:52 AM
Well Mesdoline, science is about coming closer to objective truth, hence the term "hypothesis".
Some of my friends are pretty sure Stephen Hawking's is closer to the truth than the bible, but I'm a bit of a fence sitter, I like hearing both points of view.

posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 07:40 PM
Ok...well in my opinion the bible has both a lot of truth and a lot of poop.
The way that you spoke of reality felt to me as though you seperated it from the perception that other intelligent beings have, like human beings. If i thought your post was 70% wrong and 30% right within my perception of reality, would reality be 70% in favour and 30% against your post?

I know that sounds like a silly question but i'll push it there any way that you can tell me what percentage ultimate reality is for or against your post?

The point im trying to make is that you have to incorporate literally EVERYTHING into your definition of reality to come to some conclusion about it, and everything would include every possibility that exists. Not an easy thing to stick percentages on, which is why i was a little annoyed that it was done with such ease in the hypothesis. I'm not bashing you for looking for answers though...i'd like some myself to be honest.

posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 07:54 PM
What about the infinite possibility spectrum? We are just now reaching into or I should say finding out about alternate realities! For example this states in a mathematical equation over and over again that with each separate atom there can be found multiple "strings" which are said to be alternate dimensions! I haven't looked at all the math because it is huge! So my point, if there are alternate realities and each having many different combination's of possibilities then what makes you think we can narrow everything down to an exact science or even pin point the exact reality of which you now sit. We each perceive reality alittle differently than the next man, so it's in your perception that your own reality lies.

However I would like to hear other opinions on the matter.

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 12:24 AM
I find that very interesting, I like probabilities where reality responds to user input in a kind and loving way that is good for people like you and me most of all
With regards to subjective perception of objective reality, you are completely correct, thereby all entities are, at some level, in the subjective-objective playing field, and this will eternally be the case while sentience exists.

top topics


log in