I strongly disagree that any of the four problems you claim are solved are actually solved.
Is there a God? Yes, there are tons of Gods, many of which are probably convergent. That said, is there a God in the sense that religionists and spiritualists yammer on about? It depends on what you mean by God. Something could have increased the relative reality fluid of something like the relevant part of this Hubble volume, and such a thing may be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent with respect to the computations going on in the relevant part of this Hubble volume. Something like Brahma might end up being relevant somehow. We’re mostly confident that the existence of the Christian God as described by Christians is probably decision theoretically trivial. People who have profound spiritual experiences may be tapping into something important and universal.
What’s the solution to the mind-body problem? Materialism or substance dualism, depending on interpretation. Materialism is akin to belief in physics, dualism is akin to belief in computer science.
Do we have free will? We get some of our reality fluid from worlds where we have free will, and some of our reality fluid from worlds where our decisions have no actual bearing on anything except perhaps through counterfactual acausal control. However, since decision theoretically we only care about the worlds where we actually do have leverage in shaping the future, we do have free will in the relevant sense, even though taking this for granted may cause us to miss opportunities for timeless negotiation. Also, it may be that relative existence is actually defined by decision theoretic significance, in which case we nearly always have free will unless we’re part of a larger system that has the actual free will or something.
What is the One True Meaning of any such word? We don’t know what the One True Meaning should be, and we won’t until we’re smarter. This question is unsolved.
What specifically do you mean by substance dualism being akin to belief in computer science? I can imagine at least two things you might mean, but I still don’t really see the point of the simile.
I strongly disagree that any of the four problems you claim are solved are actually solved.
Is there a God? Yes, there are tons of Gods, many of which are probably convergent. That said, is there a God in the sense that religionists and spiritualists yammer on about? It depends on what you mean by God. Something could have increased the relative reality fluid of something like the relevant part of this Hubble volume, and such a thing may be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent with respect to the computations going on in the relevant part of this Hubble volume. Something like Brahma might end up being relevant somehow. We’re mostly confident that the existence of the Christian God as described by Christians is probably decision theoretically trivial. People who have profound spiritual experiences may be tapping into something important and universal.
What’s the solution to the mind-body problem? Materialism or substance dualism, depending on interpretation. Materialism is akin to belief in physics, dualism is akin to belief in computer science.
Do we have free will? We get some of our reality fluid from worlds where we have free will, and some of our reality fluid from worlds where our decisions have no actual bearing on anything except perhaps through counterfactual acausal control. However, since decision theoretically we only care about the worlds where we actually do have leverage in shaping the future, we do have free will in the relevant sense, even though taking this for granted may cause us to miss opportunities for timeless negotiation. Also, it may be that relative existence is actually defined by decision theoretic significance, in which case we nearly always have free will unless we’re part of a larger system that has the actual free will or something.
What is the One True Meaning of any such word? We don’t know what the One True Meaning should be, and we won’t until we’re smarter. This question is unsolved.
What specifically do you mean by substance dualism being akin to belief in computer science? I can imagine at least two things you might mean, but I still don’t really see the point of the simile.