If there is one major theory that is quietly developing among the theories of the nature of reality, it is the simulation theory. A long while ago, after a bit of a crippling faith crisis, I had fallen into this rabbit hole because I had convinced myself that if I didn’t disprove this theory, there was a possibility that there were beings higher than God and thus the redemption through Christ may be fake. Unfortunately, there didn’t seem to be much actual dialogue regarding evidence for and against (then or even now) but rather conspiracy theorizing on a giant scale.
I’ve internalized this theory since, and considering that (if true), it simply implies the existence of a higher being. In other words, it doesn’t bother me as much anymore. That is, within scientific discussions about the concept. There is competing evidence either way (including the recent “information as a fundamental form of matter” studies going on) and does constitute series scientific discourse. However, there seems to be a much larger “conspiracy” version of the theory that gets thrown around with more noise. Recently, by whatever means, I heard of some old book called “The Baron Collection.” Essentially, there is so much commotion because it seems to “predict” Trump’s modern presidency from a century ago. Of course, it is hard to understand such a coincidence, but ever harder to do so when people are using the book as evidence for either time travel (which we know is impossible due to the laws of physics) or that we live in a simulation. I remember reading that even Joe Rogan (the man who usually stirs these sorts of pots) had commented that the book seems to imply that the “programmers” leave “Easter eggs” as they coded our word.
I wouldn’t mind having discussions about the scientific side of simulation theory, but what sometimes gets me nervous again is the loud noise from the internet surrounding the idea. You can’t look up simulation theory news without seeing clickbait videos or even clickbait scientific news articles regarding it. Heck, an entire subreddit is dedicated to this theory. I typically don’t give the noise much recognition but that it exactly what gets me nervous: in my head, if I’m not investigating the evidence that gets thrown around (and there is a lot of it), I feel as though I’m dismissing the other side, which is a fallacious way of arguing and finding truth. I know that if I ever tried to dive into one of these holes again, it will take me a long while to ease the crippling anxiety I got from it originally. These two competing attitudes often leaves me at a loss as to what to do.
What are your guys thoughts on this theory? How would you recommend others to go about dealing with hordes of “evidence” regarding theories like this?