Can someone still be an athiest if they believe our universe is a simulation?

[Crumpets]

There's been some talk in recent years arguing that our entire universe may be a simulation by an advanced species for scientific purposes. Here are some articles with more detail:

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/sunday/is-the-universe-a-simulation.html?_r=0
http://www.space.com/30124-is-our-universe-a-fake.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis

Personally, I think it's pretty far far-fetched, but I know a couple people who entertain this possibility. Interestingly, though, I think most of these people would consider themselves atheists.

Can one still be considered an atheist if they believe our universe was consciously created and designed down to the last detail, as long as they believe it's aliens or other mortals, or does this very notion imply a level of divinity on the creator?

[dead0man]

yes


They might be wrong of course, or maybe our words couldn't describe what that entity is exactly.  If aliens can create a universe, potentially monitor it and mess with it....what's the difference between them and a god anyway?

[RINO Tom]

Sure, but it wouldn't effectively matter, would it?  Whoever or whatever created our simulation of a Universe, if proven to be real, would serve the purpose of God and effectively prove such a God's existence.  We would just shift the debate to where militant Christians would claim this is proof of the Biblical God, and militant atheists would say it proves those stories are bullshlt because whatever "creator" we found is no God (says who, by the way?).  Pointless distinction, if you ask me.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I would find it much harder to be a theist in such a scenario!

[Associate Justice PiT]

Sure, but it wouldn't effectively matter, would it?  Whoever or whatever created our simulation of a Universe, if proven to be real, would serve the purpose of God and effectively prove such a God's existence.  We would just shift the debate to where militant Christians would claim this is proof of the Biblical God, and militant atheists would say it proves those stories are bullshlt because whatever "creator" we found is no God (says who, by the way?).  Pointless distinction, if you ask me.

     It would altogether change the tenor of such arguments if we found that there was a being that could be defined as a God, but lacked the attributes of the Christian God. Details such as omnipotence or omniscience are important and it could be argued whether such attributes could be imputed to these sufficiently advanced aliens. However, it would make no sense to identify them as the origin of morality, as the Christian God is held to be.

[Kingpoleon]

Creation of a grand scale by a single individual is pretty close to the definition of demigods/semi-divine.

[Meclazine for Israel]

The particles that make up the atoms from which we are made have a binary system of interaction defined by quantum mechanics.

We are essentially a bunch of predefined 1's and 0's.

However, there are two problems with the simulation argument.

Firstly, the laws of physics are too complex at each scale. The interactions of the largest members of our Universe such as black holes are extremely violent thanks to gravity. These interactions would not be the byproduct of a being setting up the Universe using subatomic particles in a simulator.

Secondly, it is extremely boring. Earth has existed for 99.9997% of its lifetime without Human Beings.

So the creator did not make the Universe for our benefit. Algae have been pumping out oxygen for 3 billion years until we were oxygenated at the right level to get walking.

We owe our theological existence to the God of Algae.

Therefore the answer to your question is a clear no.

If you believe it is a simulation, then you must believe in the creator of that simulation.

[afleitch]

Yes. If we live in a simulation our subjective reality feels real, but it is in fact objectively a simulation. Someone may have created that simulation but that someone must live in either 'actual reality' or perhaps is also in a simulation. It cannot be godlike if it's also a simulation. Nor can it be considered so if it's subject to a reality outside of it's self which it doesn't have domain over.

[Mopsus]

Yes. If we live in a simulation our subjective reality feels real, but it is in fact objectively a simulation. Someone may have created that simulation but that someone must live in either 'actual reality' or perhaps is also in a simulation. It cannot be godlike if it's also a simulation. Nor can it be considered so if it's subject to a reality outside of it's self which it doesn't have domain over.

Under that definition, Mormons should be considered atheists, as they believe that God was once subject to the same restraints as man.