>>11979891I can assure you there is well-thought out theory behind what I said.
Language is a mathematical structure. A metalanguage is a language that can speak about a sub-order language as its object language. The metalanguage of reality is the n-th degree metalanguage that has enough expressive power to embed all scientific languages from science, formal/rational languages from mathematics and logic, and crucially, philosophical language that serves as the bridge connecting theories, symbols, and equations to their corresponding phenomenon. It also includes an arbitrary number of self-inclusive mappings
since reality can be formulated as a language, it follows that it must both configure and process itself. Reality is clearly dynamic, so there must be something that does the expression and interpretation. There is nothing else that could do the job, since nothing else is real
the fundamental rules of perception and intelligebility is 2-valued logic. If something didn't conform to 2-valued logic, it would be impossible to perceive it clearly or make sense of it. It would be impossible to make a theory about it, to explain it. So for something to be real, it has to be embedded in the 2-valued logical structure of reality, that is, in the language of reality. But that language permits a huge number of possibilities other than then one we currently inhabit, that is, it permits the metalanguage of reality to express other "sets of sentences" than the one we're currently inhabiting. There are a set of potential worlds that conform to those rules of syntax. Other possible self-simulations
