Jack Symes

So there are good universes too. But on the whole, that means you've got an uncountable number of bad universes and an uncountable number of good universes. So I think if the multiverse theory is actually true, as agnostics or atheists, we should be really fucking worried. Like this is a horrible state of affairs.

If there are all of these worlds, if you actually believe that they exist, you shouldn't be singing and buzzing with the bees and jumping with the shrimp and being all excited about existence. Like we should be really concerned.

There's a couple of problems there, right? Well, there's three big problems that come out of it. The main one, which we've just linked to, is like... if you're trying to weigh up the overall value of existence, is the world, i.e. the multiverse, a good thing on the whole or a bad thing?

And I think if you say that there is, let's just say it's infinite, even though it might not be, if you say there's infinite suffering and infinite goodness, that doesn't seem like you can be optimistic. You'd have to go, on the whole, the existence is like neutral, mixed, or maybe it's bad.

Maybe you don't want a city where everyone's getting tortured next door to a city where everyone's living a blissful life.

Maybe. Well, it's sort of mental masturbation in the sense that, like, it just means that you can't, when you contemplate all of existence, think that it's an overall good thing. So in that sense... We don't know.

For the multiverse theorists, I'm saying, yeah.

Well, this is good. So let's say, entertain the multiverse view. Let's pretend it's true, right? And so you've got infinite pleasure, happiness, and infinite suffering and pain. So I think once you do minus one from the other, you've got a neutral set of existence. Let's just say this. So on balance, it's about the same.

So if you're a pantheist and you believe in the God of the multiverse, if you embrace multiverse theism, then you can't believe that God is good in the same way. There's also a problem which is, you mentioned something like the process, right? But there are worlds in which this process has already been realized.

It doesn't really matter if our world reaches that or not in the grand scheme of calculating the amount of good and bad in the world. You might think that some people say stuff like this, right? They go, I want to stop eating meat or stop taking long-haul flights. But really, when it comes down to it, it doesn't really matter whether I buy that chicken or take that flight.

It's not going to impact the overall good and bad that's in the world. It's a drop in a huge ocean that really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of it. If the multiverse theory is true, something like that hits a little bit harder. If your goal is to make existence as a whole greater or better, then it's nothing compared to the infinite suffering and pain that's already out there.

You can't change the overall value of existence. I still think, and I'm with you on this, I'm sort of following the line of argument to the point where it's fleshed out fully, but... Now we've said that, I still think there's a point in being moral in developing your own character, sorting out your own house or community or country or continent and the world. It seems like that's what our job is.

Yeah. It seems like that's still worthwhile.

Yeah, I think that's fine. There's other problems though that seem to fall out of this as well, right? Which is like we have a concept of what it is to be a person back to our individual subjective conscious minds.

You know, when we try and think about what it is for me to be me today is the same person born 31 years ago and the same person in the halfway point between that again to go back to Zeno. Like how am I the same person throughout time? I think the best answer to this is is something like, I have the same capacity for conscious experience.

If it was stream of consciousness, that would mean every time you drift off during me talking now, then you would die and you'd be born again when your stream of consciousness reemerges.

Yeah, like if you say Joe Rogan is that stream of consciousness, that sequence of experiences that he's undergoing now, and that stops because you drift off, that would mean your stream of consciousness has ended. Think of it like sleep. When you go into like NRN sleep and you don't have any conscious experiences, let's say, you would die according to that view.

or the reviews in philosophy which say you are your psychological continuity. Joe Rogan is the person that believes, I don't know, that Marshall is golden retriever is fantastic and that consciousness is the fundamental nature of stuff. But then if I were to strip those beliefs away from you, the psychological continuity view would say Joe Rogan doesn't exist anymore.

Because I don't exist anymore. Yeah, I get you. So I think it's like the thing that gives you your consciousness.

Yeah, but when you sleep, you have it, right? Yeah, but when you sleep, you dream. Like what is going on there? We don't even understand that. You don't think there's ever a moment when you don't have an experience? No. Well, you don't have a conscious experience because you're not conscious. That will do.