World Theory Proposal: Fish Tank Paradigm Case

Imagine a person builds a large aquarium with all the environment set up for the fishes to live in. Once the environment is suitable for the fishes to live in, such as oxygen, plants, rock, sand, and other else, it is up to the fish how to survive in that particular environment.

The fish’s eyes are so poor that they can’t see beyond the looking glass. However, they can feel turbulence caused by either the person touching the glass or some brat stir a whirlpool to the water. This is one of the theory that I initially think about how we live.

The person is acting as a God while we are the little fishes in the tank trying to make the best of our survival. No matter what we do to identify what world we are living in or how the world is created, it doesn’t matter because our eyes are just to poor to recognize the existence of outside world.

God is now just sitting in the living room without doing a thing to the fishes. He occasionally gives food but there are no means of afterlife. Once you died, then it’s over for you. Of course, this is not a good explanation of how the world is created and you probably will question on how the fishes is created and how God’s world is created.

But it gives you a chance to question God’s power to control the nature of the aquarium’s environment and relate it to the injustice that our world is facing. Because when you think that God’s power is unlimited and He is caring, how come so many people are starving and evil is prevailing? The Fish Tank Paradigm theory answer this question perfectly and creates a punny God which is relatable to the current situation in our world.

This theory of mine then will be perfected with another theory called The Data Manipulation Case which I will elaborate for next time. Until then, the discussion is open for you to debate my theory.


19 responses to “World Theory Proposal: Fish Tank Paradigm Case

  1. Very cool, Lucillia.
    I haven’t really been religious my whole life, but my mother raised us as Catholics. My personal belief is that everyone should believe in something, it doesn’t really matter what. Being well is being mentally and physically well, so I think belief is important, even if it’s something as simple as music, or art, not necessarily a higher being.

    As for my take on the universe and what not.

    I guess what makes most sense to me (and which is kind of like your fishtank paradigm) is Schrödinger’s box. We can’t really know what’s going on inside the box without opening it, just as we cannot know anything definite about the universe unless we had a complete, revealed view.

    Still I think it’s a beautiful way of looking at it, we can only assume everything, all at the same time, is occuring at once within our universe.

    • Theory of Paradox, huh? If we implement Schroedinger’s cat theorem to our world, then a parallel universe do exist until we can prove it wrong, which then answers your question, Lucy, there can be both case of somebody in the box.

      So in conclusion, perhaps we ourselves are God?

      • @ Lucy and Souza

        I think the simpleness of the reverse Schrödinger’s box nullifies those questions. We humans, and everything we know/ can imagine exists inside the box. Every scrap of information may exist inside the box. We can’t tell if anything is fact or fiction until we can look, empirically, from the outside of the box in. That’s the thing, we can never do this. Does god exist? Is said being in the box with us or outside of it? We’ll never know because we can’t ever know. It’s a theory of infinite possibilities, that’s why I believe every person can choose one that fulfills themseves and be content.

  2. That’s a very interesting theory but I think it ends up being too recursive. A couple of years ago me and some friends argued about how big was the universe. We could never quite grasp the concept of infinite because to us, for something to exist, it had to be somewhere so we dismissed the universe being infinite idea and assumed there had to be something beyond it. Some time later we just gave up on the subject because if we think there is something beyond the universe, something where the universe exists, then that something would in turn have something beyond it.
    I think your theory has the same problem. If we’re like fish in an aquarium, with God observing us, then in turn, God would be in his own aquarium with someone observing him.

    At any rate, looks like your theory can go somewhere, I’m really curious to hear about that Data Manipulation Case. I’ll be looking forward to it^^

    • Of course this theory doesn’t explain how world is created. It focus on God’s power and how people are living in the world with all the limited resource of power that God has.

      God is not the creator, he is merely an agent which harness the world that we live in. He can’t save us from death nor he will not take us to eternal life. He is just a watcher from behind the glass.

      • Oh, so it’s focused on the God factor… my bad, thought the theory was more about what’s out there.

        Right, so focusing on God, I think your theory is quite accurate. Assuming the existence of a God, one could assume we would be like pets to him, implying He has no control over what we do or don’t. Just like we don’t have absolute control over what our fish or dogs or whatever do. Of course, assuming there isn’t a God would take us to an identical situation in a practical sense.

        Once again sorry for my misinterpretation of your theory.

        Oh, but I AM eager to read about the Data Manipulation Case^^

      • Exactly. No problem on the misunderstanding, I know it’s a flawed theory on how the universe is created. I will do the Data Manipulation Case shortly after. It’s another thoery I gathered with Kaza-kun as my interview partner since I have a lacking knowledge of computers and electronics.

  3. I’ve also think a similar theory like this not too long ago. And I think there’s also a separate tank, that is full of goodness and the water is from the “Fountain of Life” itself.

    And I have one question, can we be worthy enough to please the owner, so that we can stay in that tank or we can just end up flushed down in the toilet?

    Well, that is an opinion I came up, after I think about a theory like this.

  4. Actually this is a really fragile theory, so any opinion given to it can change it, very easily.

    My opinion that I just gave, can also change. So I can’t pretty much debate on what I say, feel free to offend it in anyway you like.

    • Well, of course it can be change since it’s a theory. But I don’t think it’s fragile in the sense that it depicts a very strong argument about God’s power to control our universe.

    • Just like what Kaza-kun have said, this theory is not provable, so there is no right or wrong. However, it is a reflection of what I observed from the world.

      Now, if you said that this person creates a separate tank for the worthy fishes (in this case, the ones that please the owner), how does he judges how worthy we are and how the person puts the worthy fishes in the special tank without killing the fish in the first place.

  5. I think God took a long trip to the supermarket and is not gonna come back in a while. The fish can eat algae or the things that grow inside the tank and support themselves. And as the fishes have a hard time seeing outside the glass they have no idea how long God as been away, or if he even ever was there. :3

    • That I think is the most profound alternate analogy you can think from this theory. Nice argument!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s