Steven Skye Templar
220805
Philosophically, socially, theologically, and physically, the argument regarding reality versus virtual reality has become the all-consuming topic of humanity. The final result of such argument vastly determines the very value and point of human existence. The existence of Reality implies that the actions and decisions of every individual has value and determination. And the success of Reality is determined by the success of each individual’s decisions, individually and within the group, while spiced by outside variations randomly generated by natural, supernatural, and ultra-natural consequences. The existence of Virtual Reality implies that the actions and decisions of every individual are pre-determined and scripted by an outside entity – whether humanoid or mechanical. And, that the results are the determination of such outside overview – whether respectfully anticipated, or left to random impediments.
As individuals within the existence of Reality, each of us deals with a wide, chaotic collection of “life decisions” each and every day. Each one of these actions and decisions plays a significant part in the determination of our day-to-day lives. When we make properly valued decisions, we succeed in advancing our individual lives. When we make unfortunate or improperly valued decisions, we only succeed in restricting and endangering our very lives.
As communities within the existence of Reality, we create and enhance social rules that are designed to enhance each life, and every life, so that the community can provide the needs of the individuals, and the needs of the group. Such actions and goals, originally designed to enhance, only prove to restrict all enhancement of the community. Then generates the animosity of the group to go out and impede the social development of another group.
Within the existence of Virtual Reality, neither the individual nor the community have any distinct and enhanced value. As parts of a restrictive algorithm of assumed values, neither the individual nor the community can enhance or devalue the development and function of the program. The outer entity(s) writes the program, follows the successes and failures, then pre-determines milestones which either enrich or hinder the program. The best analogy is professional wrestling… looks really good, with outstanding athletes, but has no value because the result is predetermined, in the boss’ office.
Points of argument against both sides. Philosophy and theology teach us that as individuals, we are provided the education, skills, and affiliations which mold and shape our natures and personalities, so that we can, and will, enhance and improve both our individual development and the success of the community, as a whole. They set rules and standards, to provide us with the necessity dictates for behavior and social advancement. If these rules and standards are followed, then the community improves and advances. However, when we fail to succeed, as individuals, we generally take some portion of the community with us, then the whole fails. In Virtual Reality, the outcomes are predetermined, by the elites, and all of our individual and community efforts are wasted, because no matter how hard we study, how hard we work, and how hard we dream of a better land, they have already manipulated the outcome… for their own benefit. The best analogy is Nicola Tesla, the individual who strived and achieved great recognition for his education and determination, then was manipulate and destroyed by the robber barons, because his achievements would have destroyed their bank accounts.
Unfortunately, history, as we currently know it, fails to provide a clear and concise path of evidence either way. The path of history demonstrates both the successes and failures of individuals and communities. However, such path merely provides another mystery to our concerns. Upon review the average community creates and maintains a distinctive identity for a mere 300 to 600 years. The initial creation of each is enhanced by need for a group identity, and respect for the social standards. From tribal cultures to modern industry, this has been the basic behavior. The need to survive, to provide for ones self and the accepted community. In the primitive societies, the rule is the strong take care of the weak, and the weak provide all the support they can. For the vast majority of time, this standard accepted a king and vassal motif.
In tribal cultures, the strong hunt for meat, the weak hunt for vegetables. The strong defend the group from threats, and the weak protect the children. Time proceeds. Individuals enhance the community with advancements of tools and techniques. Life experience provides teaching to younger generations. Successes are past on thru generations, failures fall by the wayside.
As cultures expand, they blend with others… mostly by anger and war. Larger communities adapt to part of each previous social standards. Over time, each culture reaches a point of self-destruction, by loss of available sustainability, or by social destruction. The two major examples of our problem are the Hebrew and Chinese cultures. Both track their communities back over 5,000 years. However, neither has the history of being one single, smooth self-enhanced graduation from tribal to modern culture.
The Hebrew culture began has a tribal community, grew for a few hundred years, developing a strong self-identity, but not withstanding all the minor social sub-standards and self-awareness. The Hebrew politic spread in the form of familial sub-groups, which spread within limited territory. However, each family established its own social restrictions. A full community, by religion and ancestry, but self-defined by isolation. Upon the introduction of first the Babylonians, then the Egyptians, the Hebrew culture did not become cohesive and was scattered across half the planet. Their self-identity has proven so strong that they survived, in small, sometimes hidden, groups for the vast majority of this time. Recently, history has provided the opportunity for them to re-establish and develop a new substantial community, while several significant sub-communities have developed in other regions, to provide continued cultural existence in case of future challenges.
The Chinese culture began has a tribal community, grew for several hundred years, developing a strong central self-identity, however it, too, could not withstand all the minor social sub-standards. The significant difference between the two was warfare. The Chinese politic spread out, using warfare and strength, to maintain the self-identity, consuming all available sub-groups, and blending them into the social strength. This continued and significant advancement included people, tools, techniques, and real estate. China maintained a foundational self-identity, while facing continued challenges from internal and external adaptations by individuals and sub-groups.
Planetwide, cultures have exchanged and interchanged individuals, tools, techniques, real estate… as well as, politics and religions. Each community has experimented with its primary choices, some succeed and advanced, many failed and fell away. As an example, Russia began about 3,000 years ago, growing from small tribals into larger communities, which fought and advanced, or were absorbed. In the 1900s, Russia competed in size and development, with China, Europe, and America. Then, Lenin appeared, changed the social structure of the community, to his rules, and the Soviet Union was established and developed into a major rival of the other communities. However, Communism proved not to be the success of other politics, and only lasted for 72 years, before the community had to redefine itself, again.
Within the context of our discussion, these 3 cultures demonstrate histories with various challenges and developments. However, each presents arguments for both reality and virtual reality. Within each culture, the chain of successes and failures demonstrate similar patterns to all other communities, as well as, demonstrating interchange of tools, techniques, and lessons between communities. Each culture has added and subtracted such characteristics as work or fail within their social maturity. However, no single chain has been created, maintained, and advanced in such a pattern as to resemble a straight line for 1,000 years, within a single familial community. (For this discussion, DNA cannot be counted, although bloodlines may have been maintained, it was not maintained in a familial structure.)
The historical record can be read as Reality, by assuming that all advancements and failures follow the assumed percentage of ups and downs within Human History, where particular characteristics appear, effect the whole, then are replaced by other characteristics in a haphazard, random pattern, in the same structure as Darwin’s evolution standards. As well, the record can be read as Virtual Reality, by assuming that all advancements and failures are introduced by an outside entity(s), due to expectations in progress of the algorithms, or due to random bored-ness of the observer(s).
Recently, participants within the greater communities have introduced the contemplation of The Mandela Effect, where strange adjustments of memories create the “apparent” illusion that something as changed “history” as remembered by those who originally participated in such events. This is an apparent reaction equivalent to the “Déjà vu” effect from the movie, The Matrix. And, every one of us has, at some time in our lives, experienced a déjà vu event. We all understand the confusion and emotional challenge of such events. However, every event is an individual response, and fails to provide enough evidence to prove the results. The importance of the Mandela Effect is, if this occurs in Reality, then terms of “what Reality is” are not understood, by science or religion. If it occurs in Virtual Reality, then it demonstrates that the outside entity(s) just changes events and standards, in its separate evaluation of potential outcomes.
If the Mandela Effect does occur in Reality, the greater question is the value and determination of the Effect. The assumed structure of the Effect is “a change in the scope and direction of history” by time travel. Somebody went back to some period in time, changed “something”, and that changed the whole direction of the present, and future, leaving behind some virtually minor déjà vu effect, such as commercial product names. However, such ability, time travel, has not corrected such major events as “should have been corrected”. Philosophers spend vast time and effort trying to argue why time travel cannot change major wars, failed theologies, major famines, major diseases, or a nuclear destruction.
If the Mandela Effect does occur in Virtual Reality, the greater question is, “why do any of us even notice it?” If the outside entity(s) rewrites the equation, adapts the algorithms, and introduces new rules, there is no reasonable expectation that we would recognize even the largest déjà vu event. This is not to assume that it could not occur, there are enough curiosities within our version of “Alice in Wonderland” to create anomalies. However, it does demonstrate one extremely valuable assumption… the outside entity(s) is NOT perfect, not theologically omniscient, nor scientifically advanced beyond our concepts of achievements.
Comentarios