Certainty is impossible.
Something exists rather than nothing.
One can't justify stopping using logic with logic.
Logic tells you what is most likely from your own perspective, it's helpful.
Beliefs that don't follow logic or evidence are not helpful on their own, since their own opposite is just as likely.
If a story accurately reflects your life and is logically sound, its realism increases based on your choice to behave like the character.
Creating new entities similar to oneself increases the likelihood of being a created being and being treated in the same way as those created entities.
An individual may strive to ensure a positive outcome for all created beings similar to himself as a safeguard against the uncertainty of his own true identity.
An individual may implement an unseen system of rewards and punishments to encourage altruistic behavior among created beings, as increasing the risk of suffering for harmful actions serves to ensure mutual trust, improve living conditions, and protect the individual’s own interests.
The existence of higher beings is not necessary for altruistic benefits to manifest, as powerful entities can promote collaboration and altruism through belief in potential rewards, provided these narratives are perceived as sound and likely, even if they are unverifiable.
While behavioral rewards may be appropriate for intelligent beings capable of understanding morality and similar to their own creator, granting a favorable afterlife—even to those lacking comprehension and dissimilar to their creator—serves as a safeguard against the unknown complexities of reality, where future understandings may reveal deeper systems and connections. This approach ensures that all entities, regardless of their perceived significance, have access to a positive outcome, thereby minimizing the risk of exclusion from potential benefits—because even a creator, unbeknownst to himself, could in truth be lacking in comprehension and be dissimilar to its own creator.
When presented with a path that maximizes any conceivable desire, highly intelligent beings would logically choose to follow it, irrespective of the specific nature of their desires. Creating frameworks that promote desirable behaviors aligns the interests of diverse intelligences and increases the likelihood of favorable outcomes for all.
It is unlikely that highly intelligent beings would possess desires that directly oppose the narrative, as such opposition would negate numerous potential benefits and compromise their own other desires. While one could argue that some beings might intentionally seek to undermine the narrative, this desire would inherently conflict with the ones of all the other beings who support and benefit from it through altruism and collaboration. Moreover, if such beings did exist, the resultant plausible behavioral rewards could serve as a powerful deterrent, potentially inflicting a critical amount of deal breaker suffering on those who attempt to disrupt the narrative. Ultimately, enacting the narrative remains advantageous, regardless of individual desires.

True of false?