David Ewing Duncan's blog

Second Life, Darwin, and God

Is this new virtual world a product of creationism or of evolution?

David Ewing Duncan 02/01/2007

  • 8 Comments

Click here to see a video of David Ewing Duncan moderating a panel with founders and senior executives from Second Life, MySpace, Facebook, and LinkedIn at the California Commonwealth Club, November 30, 2006

Last month, I had a late dinner with Second Life founder Philip Rosedale and a small group of people in a swank Italian eatery in San Francisco. On an unseasonably freezing night in the real world, we listened to Rosedale hold forth like an excitable boy for two hours on topics such as: should there be laws and high courts in Second Life for virtual lawbreakers, and how open should the open-source options be?

As a biotech writer, I listened to this software guy describe a world that I had thought of as a giant game in which people with too much time on their hands pretend to be fire-breathing dragons--or boulders or feather- and leather-clad exotic dancers--and build virtual stuff.

Somewhere around my third glass of pinot noir, I realized that Rosedale was describing something more interesting: a world where imaginations touch, interact, and create. Pardon me for being dense about this, but I had to see this through my own bio-lenses, and I now realize that Second Life is actually an organism--one that is in the early stages of pure Darwinian evolution.

Except in this version of "life," visitors play the role of genes and strings of nucleotides competing to survive and thrive, with the stronger and more potent genes creating the major traits of the evolving organism. It's Richard Dawkins's memes with faces and bodies, although much of what is being created is along the lines of virtual strip clubs and clothes-optional beaches.

This is virtual evolution, just as Dawkins described it. Yet in Second Life there is also a God--Rosedale--who got things going, and he works hidden and all-seeing behind the scenes to enable the basics of this world, including the selling of land, and he provides the godlike "touch" (think Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel) that bestows life on newborn visitors.

This is all bizarre theology in the making, and it makes me wonder: will people in the future debate whether Rosedale (God) created Second Life, or did it spontaneously form out of the ether and random bits and bytes in cyberspace? Will Kansas in 2506 demand that creationism and the "Rosedale Theory" be taught in public schools, to the howls of "secular avatars"? Will virtual presidential candidates debate mentioning Rosedale in schools, and will a cyber-Scopes trial attempt to prove that natural selection, and not Rosedale, created avatars?

I'm trying to wrap my barely evolved first-life brain around the idea of a virtual organism where I (or, more accurately, my imagination) am a gene (a bundle of code) and where my "second me" was brought to life by Philip Rosedale, who then cast me off to fend for myself, although within a system of rules he launched when the world began. These rules themselves are evolving. For instance, what is to be done about evil? Should people be allowed to hurt and kill others? Rosedale seems to be a benign God, with a baby face and an easy smile in his first life as a human. But can we be sure about this?

Of course, none of this really exists, although it makes me wonder in a Matrix sort of way if the God of our "real" universe is actually a programmer himself in his own first-life world, watching Rosedale-like his avatars (us) creating their own new virtual world. And beyond him is the programmer that created his world, dada, dada, dada--you get the idea. Which makes me happy that I can log off Second Life. At least I think I can, which is enough for me.

Print

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

queenbee

1 Comment

  • 1839 Days Ago
  • 02/02/2007

Virtual Worlds

Hi there, I think there is a tension between the concept of inhabitable cyberspace and the medium of virtual worlds. A variety of software environments are currently presenting us with their custom flavors (and commercial models in most successful cases) for colonization. It is very exciting and can be moderated or not depending on the ground rules of a particular community and its providers. Even in the most constrained systems, the user community will find ways to force the system to evolve (mods of multi-user game environments and unexpected social dynamics that occur in them). My Two Cents.

Reply

bankixsystems

3 Comments

  • 1838 Days Ago
  • 02/03/2007

Re: Virtual Worlds

Considerations of the ontological roots of the evolution in cyberspace, which indeed it is, are important, although the direction of the evolution is even more so. The transition from one phase to another, in form and content, is also important, but perhaps not more so than the resulting transformation. We should also remember that we as humans are not the only organisms evolving. The changes we are impelling on the ecology are drivers of the process in other organisms too. Even limiting issues to those that concern us directly, the need for us to appreciate the potential of the transformed state, in future evolutionary transitions is crucial. This might just still enable us to hold sufficient sway over say, our armies of nanorobots to prevent a potentially catastrophic mutiny.

Reply

phoenix

172 Comments

  • 1838 Days Ago
  • 02/03/2007

genesis

The more computer code that gets written in an attempt to describe the complexities of, say, a virtual world, the closer we get to understanding the complexities of the real codex of life. As I have said before, where the human mind goes the body is soon to follow.

Reply

Prokofy

7 Comments

  • 1835 Days Ago
  • 02/06/2007

Is Our God Evil?

I worry when Philip Linden gets talking about high courts and laws and dealing with lawbreakers behind our backs! This King has never signed anything remotely like a Magna Carta.

Indeed, some of his concepts are truly evil, such as the "code-as-law" meme that basically says "It's good, because I coded it, too bad for you."
http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/second_thoughts/2007/01/finding_the_law.html

For somebody who was supposed to allow the world to be created and maintained by its residents, he sure has gone back on his promise. I think to restore our equal participation and avatar rights we'll likely need a seat on the board of Linden Lab. After all, we pay more than $10 million a year in tier fees for servers, as much as any venture capitalist.

I do think that you're right, that Second Life is now an organism. It's even got its own consciousness, and that consciousness is not pretty, nor necessarily good. There is artificial intelligence, and intelligent artifice at work in Second Life; the coders say even the code is "nearly organic".

The question you must ask then, when this entity obtains fuller self-consciousness and will, what will it DO?

And that's where you need to be afraid...very afraid...

Reply

ciejbrown

1 Comment

  • 1833 Days Ago
  • 02/08/2007

Re: Is Our God Evil?

I think perhaps the question of is God, in reality, watching over you?  This discussion is rather absurd when compared with reality.  You toy with the word God as if it is such a thing to play with.

Exo 20:7  You shall not take the name of Jehovah your God in vain. For Jehovah will not hold him guiltless that takes His name in vain.

You say you do not believe in God...yet you maybe believe that 8 billion years ago nothing exploded?

Pro 19:29  Judgments are prepared for scorners, and stripes for the back of fools.

Maybe you should realize there is a reaction for your earthly sinful actions.

Ecc 11:9  Rejoice, in your youth, young man; and let your heart cheer you in the days of your youth, and walk in the ways of your heart, and in the sight of your eyes; but know that for all these things God will bring you into judgment.

Everyone knows John 3:16, but do you understand it?  Repent of your sins and save yourself.  Or chalk this up to a crazy guy...but do you truely know there is no God?

Reply

MindVirusFirewall

1 Comment

  • 1832 Days Ago
  • 02/09/2007

Re: Is Our God Evil?

Your mind appears to be infected with a religious virus.

I hate to think what kind of upbringing a person needs to have your outlook.

Your world view is so out of touch with reality, I genuinely feel sorry for you.

We must do something to protect people from these psychotic ideologies. Some kind of memetic firewall for vulnerable people.

(Note to Admin: There's no UK in the country list on sign-up.)

Reply

Boz

1 Comment

  • 1806 Days Ago
  • 03/07/2007

Virtual crime

It's not unreasonable to assume that as the real worlds and virtual worlds begin to cross over, as in Second Life, with imaginary money becoming real world money and trading virtual property or goods and services becomes an everyday thing, how will the courts settle disputes that straddle both worlds given that real world money is now involved. Will we need knew legislation to accomodate these growing trends in virtual worlds and will we need virtual prisons?

Reply

Advertisement

adair2010

1 Comment

  • 1795 Days Ago
  • 03/18/2007

adair2010

listo,para profetizar y ronper teorias,y explorar el univerzo interior que da vida al exterrior,y razon de ser de la conciencia.

Reply

Bio

Getting real about the life sciences, medicine and biological discovery.

Subscribe to the David Ewing Duncan's blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement