FREE WILL....... or is it.

1 & 2 are unknowable ... so 3 & 4 cannot be
determined.1 is unknowable because we do not know anything about
the true nature, or indeed existence, of god.2 is unknowable because at any decision point we will only
make one of a number of possible decisions (as far as our
perceptions go). That being the case we cannot know if it
was predetermined. The appointment in Sumatra springs to
mind (is that the right city???).

How can you proove that you have free will?

If I observe a decision being made, then step back
in time and observe it again ... has the free will
evaporated?

Just trying to call into question the assumption that
perfect knowledge of the future means that the events
had to unfold in the way that they did.... where did I put that cat this time?!

Assuming linear time (big assumption I know), then any future
actor stepping into the past is there for the first and only
play of that event, however, they may not be there for the
first time.You do not enter an infinite loop, you perform a single loop
and come out of the event a second time, only the second time
you do not go back in time.Neither of your concluding remarks are relevent, since there
is the same event and no infinite looping.Has the free will evaporated?
OR
Has the observer re-observed the excercise of free will, while
having existing knowledge of the actual outcome?

Just thought I'd bump this cause I find the
discussion interesting.Sorry ... couldn't help myself

Knowing what someone will choose to do is not the
same as predetermination.From the chooser's perspective there is no
way of knowing whether or not a decision was made freely
or was directed from some outside agency.At any decision point we can only make one choice, so in hindsight
we see 'predetermination'.I guess you could say that we have a kind of 'constrained will'
in any case. We are all the sum of our experiences to date,
and their influence on our behaviour will mean that in any situation
we will only have a sub-set of the possible choices come to
mind. Different people will have different sub-sets.I once discussed this with someone who could not accept that
if you were stood on the edge of a precipice one possible choice
was to step into the abyss. He considered that not an option at all,
and defended that belief vigorously.

'Choice' is free by definition, but the question involved
in whether or not we have free will is actually the same
as whether or not we have a genuine choice.If you see what I mean.So the reasoning you put forward seems a little backward to
me ... you are assuming free will by suggesting that there IS
a choice.The question is not about how we choose, but whether or not
we could have chosen differently.That cannot be answered (unless we find we can peep into
parallel universes).

quote:

---

If we really knew what punishments of
hell awaited us, could we really do other than
choose to avoid them?

---

If we have free will, no amount of knowledge can effect
the freedom to choose one's actions.In the above it would seem ridiculous to choose otherwise,
but it is not made impossible to do so.There's a difference.It's like standing on a ledge twenty stories up. You can go
back in or you can step off. Few would choose to step off, but the
choice is open to us.

It seems to me to indicate the same kind of
'constrained will' that I feel we all have.Instead of our genetic heritage and upbrining
limiting our available choices, we have God's
direct intervention in some cases.He is not necessarily taking away all choice, but
limiting the options.

OK ... this gets tricky ... and I'm not sure that I am
right, but...Knowing how something will turn out doesn't make
that pre-determined.If I have a computer program with a bunch of conditional
logic ... but know what the condition states will be prior
to running it, I know what will happen. That doesn't mean
it had to, only that it did.Poor analogy ... cause you should always know what a
computer program will do (except when you don't and it
goes pop!)I don't actually accept 'free will' exactly anyhow ... I prefer
'constrained will'.We all have different backgrounds and pre-dispositions which
in any given situation limit the choices between which we select
as well as allow us to weigh which available option to go with.If you know enough about someone you can be failry accurate
about what they will do in a given situation ... that
doesn't mean that's what they had to do.

... hmmm .... I see what you mean.If God has loaded the deck, and knows what the environment
he has set up will make people do then they don't really
have a choice.I was only thinking of omniscience not omnipotence too.I still think that knowing the outcome before it happens doesn't
mean there wasn't free will ... but if you stack the environment
to make one outcome be THE outcome then it's gone.OK. I agree.