Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Free will: an illusion
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 181 of 309 (323196)
06-19-2006 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by New Cat's Eye
06-19-2006 10:02 AM


Re: Magic hand waving. The answer to everything?
I saw the Dune movie one time. How did Paul face this problem?
He didn't have to face it in the movie.
The movie was made from the first book in a trilogy. The other two were never movie-ized.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-19-2006 10:02 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by CK, posted 06-19-2006 3:53 PM PurpleYouko has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 309 (323197)
06-19-2006 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by PurpleYouko
06-16-2006 2:25 PM


Re: Magic hand waving. The answer to everything?
It does take away the concept of God being outside of time because it would mean the the future is still in flux even to him. he may well see all of time but as probable paths rather than certainties. He would know that a certain event will certainly happen along a specific timeline but that timeline may be one of many that have equal probablity.
I don't think god is really outside of time. I think, with his omnipotence, he is capable of being outside of time, but by default he is not.
I guess it could be argued that if he knows which timeline would become reality then we are back to square one but maybe it could be argued that since (at the time of knowing) all the timelines are equally real so it doesn't matter.
I think god wants us to have free will and I think he allows us to have free will. Being omniscient and omnipotent, he could totally determine everything and we would be living without free will. But I don't think god does this, I think he allows us to have free will by keeping the future open to other possibilities and not exercising his ability to control everything.
Why would he want a bunch of robots running around down here when he could have a bunch of people? Saying that free will is what makes us people and not robots. I think people make much better pets that robots....lol. [/joking around]
Am I making any kind of sense here or am I just rambling?
You make plenty of sense to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-16-2006 2:25 PM PurpleYouko has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 183 of 309 (323198)
06-19-2006 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by PurpleYouko
06-19-2006 10:05 AM


Re: Magic hand waving. The answer to everything?
However what does this say for the free will of the people involved in the prohecy?
Do they really have a choice to NOT fulfil it if God is using his omnipotence to force them to?
I don't look at free will as an all or none thing. God might have to remove some of the freedom of someone's will in order to have a prophecy fullfilled, because he wants it to happen bad enough.
It sounds a lot like I look at omniscience and omnipotence. I usually just wave my hand though...
That's probably the best way. What say we just stick with it eh?
Sure. Like I typed earlier, its not like were gonna stumble upon some great realization about omni-stuff. Its all opinions and personal preference, and its really easy to start the hand waving when talking about omnipotence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-19-2006 10:05 AM PurpleYouko has not replied

PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 184 of 309 (323204)
06-19-2006 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 180 by iano
06-19-2006 10:06 AM


Re: Absolutely right
You are pointing out the difference we have regarding the word 'discussion'. For me (and I'd warrant all around here) discussion is something that is assumed not to involve pre-determination.
And therein lies the entire problem.
You say you cannot ask the question since to do so would mean that you are not having a discussion in the sense described above.
Why can't you ask the question?
because the obvious answer is that if every action we ever make is foreknown then we have no free will and this (in your view) makes discussion meaningless.
However if you look at it dispassionately you will see that if that is the logical outcome of the premises then either.
  1. That's just the way it is regardless of your feelings about the matter.
  2. Your premises are wrong.
Refusing to ask the question is no way out.
We may be able to discuss but you singing LA LA LA and getting annoyed at me is as predetermined as that which I say which annoys you is - according to you. I am predetermined not to see the point in the discussion. Forced not to discuss in fact. No doubt you will agree with this.
Quite possibly but don't make the common mistake of equating predeterminism with fatalism.
In the former we have no choice but have absolutely no idea what is going to happen.
In the latter we make some arbitrary decision that "This is the way God wants it" and refuse to do anything about a situation. (a bit like the way that some people will refuse medical attention for a child claiming that "God wants them to die" when in fact God might have actually wanted the child to be treated)
That way is to claim knowledge of God's mind. That is an invalid position and we don't want to go there.
"Predetermined not to consider" would be more accurate going by your argument. (if we are sounding silly in saying such things then that is alas, unavoidable)
Doesn't sound silly to me. It sounds perfectly in line with what I have been saying. Neither you nor I have any choice in what we do, say or write.
Not at all. If you look back at what you have written you will see that you have assumed free will of yourself and myself all the way through - except for the statement that you and I have none.
In some places I have agreed that what little evidence we have points towards us having free will. I have also stated that whether we do have it or not, to us it appears that we have and that it makes absolutely no difference to our actions either way.
The fact is that whether we actually have free will or whether we don't have it, The logical conclusion of the agreed upon premises can only be that we DON'T.
I never claimed we didn't.
I actually claimed that the premise was wrong.
Remove omnipotence and the logical conundrum goes away.
BTW you never once answered my question at the bottom of Message 127
here it is again.
PY writes:
The question: If said god knows, with the kind of certainty that I cannot even dream of, that on a specific day, at a specific time, I will make a specific choice to perform a specific action, ........ Is there any way that I can make a different choice than the one that he knows I will make?
If you can answer that question with a simple yes or no then this discussion will be over.
IF NO then.... Free will is negated. I have absolutely no real choice since despite the illusion of free will, every choice I will ever make is 100% foreknown. To all intents and purposes I am a robot.
If YES then.... Omniscience is negated since me having the genuine free will meams that nobody can ever have any kind of foreknowledge of what I am going to do next.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 10:06 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 11:28 AM PurpleYouko has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 185 of 309 (323205)
06-19-2006 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by New Cat's Eye
06-19-2006 10:02 AM


Re: Magic hand waving. The answer to everything?
Do you think god would be cruel if she was capricious?
Yes in the sense of arbitrary and capricious. If GOD is capricious, then there really are no rules, no right and wrong, no freewill and no standards.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-19-2006 10:02 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-19-2006 5:43 PM jar has replied

Heathen
Member (Idle past 1284 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 186 of 309 (323208)
06-19-2006 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by iano
06-17-2006 11:30 AM


Re: Suspending Disbelief
iano writes:
And the way I chose to do it is to show you that one cannot rationally answer 'yes' to the question "Does an all knowing God render free will an illusion" I think I've shown that a 'yes' answer is an impossible one.
I don't think you have. Numerous mentions of illogic and logical fallacies do not constitute a response to this issue. I'm sorry, but it really appears like you're trying hard to side step this...
however... the opportunity remains for you to respond to the other two points.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by iano, posted 06-17-2006 11:30 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 10:49 AM Heathen has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 187 of 309 (323214)
06-19-2006 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by Heathen
06-19-2006 10:32 AM


Re: Suspending Disbelief
I don't think you have. Numerous mentions of illogic and logical fallacies do not constitute a response to this issue. I'm sorry, but it really appears like you're trying hard to side step this...
Side step? Not at all. You seem happy to accept that without free will you are a machine which assumes it can arrive at conclusions which reflect the way things actually are (given the assumptions) - as opposed to conclusions which a machine must arrive at - conclusions which have no particular reason to reflect that which is actually going on. How you manage to break out of this circle has not been made manifest.
however... the opportunity remains for you to respond to the other two points.
Okay. Shall we drop question 1 then?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Heathen, posted 06-19-2006 10:32 AM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Heathen, posted 06-19-2006 2:00 PM iano has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 188 of 309 (323233)
06-19-2006 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by PurpleYouko
06-19-2006 10:27 AM


Re: Absolutely right
I'm afraid I've come to the end of this discussion on this point with you PY. You continually insert words like thinking and feeling and choice and opinion as if they meant anything. But you accept (for the sake of discussion) that you are a predetermined machine without even showing how it is that a machine would 'accept' such a thing. No argument other than "machinedidit"
If you can't see that that premise slits its own throat then I cannot help it anymore
Whilst we wait for our thread originator to respond on moving onto questions 2 and 3 you might figure out how to reword this after removing the words 'make a choice'. You obviously cannot use phrase that has no meaning.
The question: If said god knows, with the kind of certainty that I cannot even dream of, that on a specific day, at a specific time, I will make a specific choice to perform a specific action, ........ Is there any way that I can make a different choice than the one that he knows I will make?
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-19-2006 10:27 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-19-2006 11:34 AM iano has not replied

PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 189 of 309 (323236)
06-19-2006 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 188 by iano
06-19-2006 11:28 AM


Re: Absolutely right
I'm afraid I've come to the end of this discussion on this point with you PY.
More to the point you have refused to start the discussion.
This seems to be the way it always goes with us.
You just lay out a premise that precludes any answer you don't like then just avoid the issue.
You are right. We are at an end of this discussion. As I said before, this is a pointless waste of time.
You quote my question. How about answering it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 11:28 AM iano has not replied

Heathen
Member (Idle past 1284 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 190 of 309 (323296)
06-19-2006 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by iano
06-19-2006 10:49 AM


Re: Suspending Disbelief
Iano..
You believe:
a) we have free will
b) God is all knowing
I believe:
a)Free will and an all knowing god are incompatible
b)Therefore, either We do not have free will or God is not all knowing
THe illogic is in your beliefs. when we examine the extent of any free will when all outcomes are forknown, it becomes obvious that there can be no co existance of free will and an A.K. God.
iano writes:
Okay. Shall we drop question 1 then?
I have been suggesting this for some time now.. If you are unwilling or unable to address the first question head on then there is little point in considering it. You have not AFAIAC shown any illogic in my question, but rather my question shows the illogic of your position.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 10:49 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 2:04 PM Heathen has replied
 Message 192 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-19-2006 2:11 PM Heathen has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 191 of 309 (323301)
06-19-2006 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Heathen
06-19-2006 2:00 PM


Re: Suspending Disbelief
Stalemate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Heathen, posted 06-19-2006 2:00 PM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Heathen, posted 06-19-2006 2:24 PM iano has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 192 of 309 (323305)
06-19-2006 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Heathen
06-19-2006 2:00 PM


I replied to you in Message 135, and you can follow the discssion I had with PY there which elaborates and clarifies, but I'd still like to read a response from you, if you would.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Heathen, posted 06-19-2006 2:00 PM Heathen has not replied

Heathen
Member (Idle past 1284 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 193 of 309 (323313)
06-19-2006 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by iano
06-19-2006 2:04 PM


Re: Suspending Disbelief
Stalemate? to me that suggests that both sides of the argument are equally strong so as to make further discussion pointless...
in this case you are simply refusing to address the issue. because the outcome will undermine your beliefs..
let's move on to the other two points.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 2:04 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by iano, posted 06-19-2006 3:49 PM Heathen has replied

Heathen
Member (Idle past 1284 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 194 of 309 (323319)
06-19-2006 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by New Cat's Eye
06-16-2006 11:16 AM


I didn't reply to this because PY had covered all the points I wanted to say.. also, My issue is primarily with ianos belief in an all knowing god.
catholic scientist writes:
He has the power to make the contradiction possible
see the opening post:
creavolution writes:
if your response is going to be along the lines of "well we couldn't possibly understand what god's plan is" don't bother... please.
handwaving of this sort is not a valid argument you are simply saying well It's god.. he can do anything... *magic*
there is no argueing with that position. there is no logic involved in it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-16-2006 11:16 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 195 of 309 (323354)
06-19-2006 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Heathen
06-19-2006 2:24 PM


Re: Suspending Disbelief
You are forgetting that your position in the OP says that the assumption of an all knowing God renders free will an illusion. You haven't actually said how that case is made yet. At least not in a way which takes account of the consequences that immediately follow.
In taking on the assumption yourself and supposing a 'yes' you agree that that renders you a machine. But you haven't yet said how it is that a machine could provide a yes answer to the question. You seem to accept that you have free will for the purposes of deciding 'yes' whilst all the while accepting the no free will means you can't answer questions. You would not exist.
Granted you haven't begged the question as PY has done in supposing that thinking machines exist (us). But do you not see the horns of the dilemma on which you are caught?
The offer of stalemate was not proffered because I saw the arguments as equal. It was offered in order that we could move on. You are in an impossible position. The answer to the question must be no in order for the question to be asked.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Heathen, posted 06-19-2006 2:24 PM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-19-2006 4:01 PM iano has replied
 Message 201 by Heathen, posted 06-19-2006 4:29 PM iano has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024