Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,647 Year: 4,904/9,624 Month: 252/427 Week: 62/103 Day: 6/14 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Free will vs Omniscience
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 151 of 1444 (763178)
07-21-2015 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by PaulK
07-21-2015 6:52 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
or that God deliberately arranges it (which is even worse for you).
Why is that worse for me?
All your methods either assume that the cat will inevitably die
Yes, but the issue is whether the death of the cat could be said to be inevitable before God's prediction. You claim that such must be the case. But clearly some of the cases I provided, do not require any such thing.
Again, I have yet to see any defense from you that foreknowledge implies that an outcome must have existed at all times.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by PaulK, posted 07-21-2015 6:52 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by PaulK, posted 07-22-2015 12:40 AM NoNukes has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 152 of 1444 (763179)
07-22-2015 12:40 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by NoNukes
07-21-2015 11:54 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
quote:
Why is that worse for me?
If you're trying to deny God's responsibility for an event, having God directly arrange it only makes it more obvious that God IS responsible
quote:
Yes, but the issue is whether the death of the cat could be said to be inevitable before God's prediction. You claim that such must be the case. But clearly some of the cases I provided, do not require any such thing.
Some of them deny the sort of foreknowledge usually attributed to God, yes. So what ? We've already got that far.
quote:
Again, I have yet to see any defense from you that foreknowledge implies that an outcome must have existed at all times.
I'm not claiming that limited foreknowledge based on arranging particular events or lacking the ability to see the entire future is necessarily a problem. However I have defended my actual claim.
As I've already pointed out, genuine foreknowledge of an event has the inevitability of an event as a prerequisite. Omniscience is usually taken to includes certain foreknowledge of the entire future, and therefore the entire future must be fixed from the moment of creation. Got that ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by NoNukes, posted 07-21-2015 11:54 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by NoNukes, posted 07-22-2015 12:55 AM PaulK has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 153 of 1444 (763180)
07-22-2015 12:55 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by PaulK
07-22-2015 12:40 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
If you're trying to deny God's responsibility for an event, having God directly arrange it only makes it more obvious that God IS responsible
This discussion is hypothetical. I am simply exploring the possibilities of free will existing along side foreknowledge. If there are consequences of that, so be it. The situation still presents an alternative to what you are saying is required.
I'm not claiming that limited foreknowledge based on arranging particular events or lacking the ability to see the entire future is necessarily a problem.
I agree that seeing the entire future would eliminate free will.
But what I am suggesting is that an unexercised ability to see the entire future does not necessarily do so. The act of exercising the ability may require converting a portion otherwise non-deterministic universe into a deterministic one. For example, an omnipotent being could exert himself to forsee the result of a Shrodinger's cat experiment without affecting most of the rest of the universe in any way.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by PaulK, posted 07-22-2015 12:40 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by PaulK, posted 07-22-2015 1:15 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 154 of 1444 (763181)
07-22-2015 1:15 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by NoNukes
07-22-2015 12:55 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
quote:
This discussion is hypothetical. I am simply exploring the possibilities of free will existing along side foreknowledge. If there are consequences of that, so be it. The situation still presents an alternative to what you are saying is required.
Only by assuming limits to foreknowledge. So you're still adding nothing to the discussion that hasn't already been said.
quote:
But what I am suggesting is that an unexercised ability to see the entire future does not necessarily do so
Then objections which assume that God lacks the ability to see the entire future are hardly relevant, then.
Instead you are arguing against the position that to be knowable a truth must actually be true.
quote:
The act of exercising the ability may require converting a portion otherwise non-deterministic universe into a deterministic one.
Which is not really the ability to know the future, just the ability to coerce the future. Limiting omniscience and making all prediction very much a matter of deliberate choice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by NoNukes, posted 07-22-2015 12:55 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 155 of 1444 (763190)
07-22-2015 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by jar
07-21-2015 12:03 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
jar writes:
If God knows the decisions we will make before we make them then we have no freewill.
I don't think this is true.
Again, I think it depends on what definition of freewill you're using.
If you're using something like "has the ability to make a decision based upon your own personal reasoning abilities" then freewill can still exist as I've described it (God had no foreknowledge at the point of creation, but can view the future as we view the past).
The only way for us to have freewill and for the God to have any foreknowledge is if the God can also be wrong.
I don't think so, what about this:
God created us without foreknowledge (creation of the universe - God has no idea if I'm going left or right in 2025).
After being created, God has foreknowledge of what we are going to decide based upon our own personal reasoning abilities (in 2015, God has foreknowledge that I'm going to choose to take the left path in 2025).
God is not wrong.
In 2030, even I have past-knowledge of me taking the left path in 2025.
In this scenario, God has foreknowledge, and can't be wrong (in 2015), and we have freewill.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by jar, posted 07-21-2015 12:03 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by jar, posted 07-22-2015 9:05 AM Stile has replied
 Message 165 by Phat, posted 07-22-2015 2:08 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 156 of 1444 (763191)
07-22-2015 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by ringo
07-21-2015 12:20 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
ringo writes:
In summary, I don't think either "free will" or "omniscience" is a very useful concept.
That is something I completely agree with.
I think this entire conversation is moot simply because the concepts aren't really well defined and are kind of immature... in a "my dad is bigger than your dad, oh yeah? My Dad is infinite!!!" kind of sense...
But, sometimes it's fun to put yourself into a sci-fi universe and see what would result if you simply assume some certain basic rules.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by ringo, posted 07-21-2015 12:20 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 157 of 1444 (763192)
07-22-2015 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by PaulK
07-21-2015 1:49 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
PaulK writes:
For your decision to knowable it must be fixed, inevitable before you even exist.
Yeah, I don't see why that must be the case.
I certainly understand how it would make it simple and easy for it to be knowable.
Especially when talking about an "omniscient" being...
I guess it depends on how you see "the future."
If you see "the future" as impossible to view for any being at any time... then yeah, you're right... there's no "looking ahead" that's going to make any sense at that point.
However, if you see "the future" as something that just hasn't happened yet... then you start to allow the possibility of some omniscient being knowing what's going to happen by simply viewing the future as we view the past.
Certain decisions, I like to think I can choose whatever, whenever (like if I want water or pop when I go to the movies).
Certain decisions, I like to think would be the same no matter what time or place they happened in (like choosing 2.5% mortgage vs. a 3.2% mortgage).
Is it possible for an omniscient being to look into my future and see that even my "flippant" ("random") decisions like water or pop are as solid in-whatever-situation-I-find-myself-in-at-the-time as my "important" ("no-brainer") decisions like a cheaper mortgage rate?
My thought processes for this exercise are assuming "yes" is the answer to that question.
But it's not like I have any actual data to back that up
If that it is true then God must know that IF he creates THAT universe then you will necessarily choose the left path.
Therefore God has knowingly dictated that you will choose the left path.
I agree that in this sort of situation... we do not have freewill. At this point, we could delve into a discussion about the difference between "real freewill" and "the illusion of freewill" and if there's actually any practical difference as far as "making a decision using your own intelligent reasoning skills" is concerned..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by PaulK, posted 07-21-2015 1:49 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by PaulK, posted 07-22-2015 9:19 AM Stile has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34063
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 158 of 1444 (763193)
07-22-2015 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by Stile
07-22-2015 8:46 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
I see no freewill in your scenario unless we can decide to take the right path and God be wrong.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Stile, posted 07-22-2015 8:46 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by Phat, posted 07-22-2015 11:08 AM jar has replied
 Message 167 by Stile, posted 07-22-2015 2:55 PM jar has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 159 of 1444 (763194)
07-22-2015 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by Stile
07-22-2015 8:58 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
quote:
you see "the future" as impossible to view for any being at any time... then yeah, you're right... there's no "looking ahead" that's going to make any sense at that point.
To view "the future" there must be a singular "the future" rather than a big mess of "might-be"s. And that's the point.
quote:
However, if you see "the future" as something that just hasn't happened yet... then you start to allow the possibility of some omniscient being knowing what's going to happen by simply viewing the future as we view the past.
Which is what I was describing. The future must be as fixed as the past for it to be possible to view it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Stile, posted 07-22-2015 8:58 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Stile, posted 07-22-2015 3:07 PM PaulK has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18389
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 160 of 1444 (763199)
07-22-2015 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by jar
07-22-2015 9:05 AM


Free Will & A God Who Is Wrong At Times
jar writes:
I see no freewill in your scenario unless we can decide to take the right path and God be wrong.
So the only way to truly have free will is if God is wrong occasionally?
Edited by Phat, : spallin

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by jar, posted 07-22-2015 9:05 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by ringo, posted 07-22-2015 11:38 AM Phat has replied
 Message 162 by jar, posted 07-22-2015 11:43 AM Phat has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 497 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 161 of 1444 (763200)
07-22-2015 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by Phat
07-22-2015 11:08 AM


Re: Free Will & A God Who Is Wrong At Times
Phat writes:
So the only way to truly have free will is if God is wrong occasionally?
From God's point of view, He's always right (unless He changes His mind). If we have "free will", we should be free to consider God wrong, from our point of view.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Phat, posted 07-22-2015 11:08 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Phat, posted 07-22-2015 2:02 PM ringo has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34063
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 162 of 1444 (763202)
07-22-2015 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by Phat
07-22-2015 11:08 AM


Re: Free Will & A God Who Is Wrong At Times
Phat writes:
So the only way to truly have free will is if God is wrong occasionally?
That would of course be the result but what is needed for us to have freewill is for god not to know the future.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Phat, posted 07-22-2015 11:08 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Phat, posted 07-22-2015 1:57 PM jar has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18389
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 163 of 1444 (763212)
07-22-2015 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by jar
07-22-2015 11:43 AM


Re: Free Will & A God Who Is Wrong At Times
jar writes:
what is needed for us to have freewill is for god not to know the future.
Is it logical for the Creator of all seen and unseen to not know the future? Is there any particular reason that we dare imagine a God who not only does not know the future but is essentially amoral? Not personable?
Ive researched your basic idea of God.
jar writes:
GOD is complete.
GOD is all.
GOD is Yin and Yang.
GOD was and is and will be.
Is GOD worthy of respect, acknowledgement or praise? IMHO, yes.
And fear and awe.
And love and honor.
GOD Is!
And yet humans are supposed to correct this God when God gets something wrong!! Unbelievable!
Anyway...my conclusion has yet to be reached on this subject.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by jar, posted 07-22-2015 11:43 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by jar, posted 07-22-2015 2:48 PM Phat has replied
 Message 169 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-22-2015 3:24 PM Phat has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18389
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 164 of 1444 (763214)
07-22-2015 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by ringo
07-22-2015 11:38 AM


Re: Free Will & A God Who Is Wrong At Times
ringo writes:
If we have "free will", we should be free to consider God wrong, from our point of view.
His allowing us to even have free will was allowing us to even have a point of view apart from His. Perhaps He wanted us to have the freedom to disagree with Him. We may have to ask Lucifer about that one, though I doubt we could get a straight answer out of him.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by ringo, posted 07-22-2015 11:38 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by ringo, posted 07-23-2015 11:39 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18389
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 165 of 1444 (763215)
07-22-2015 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Stile
07-22-2015 8:46 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Stile writes:
God has foreknowledge of what we are going to decide based upon our own personal reasoning abilities (in 2015, God has foreknowledge that I'm going to choose to take the left path in 2025).
God is not wrong.
In 2030, even I have past-knowledge of me taking the left path in 2025.
In this scenario, God has foreknowledge, and can't be wrong (in 2015), and we have freewill.
I think I see your argument. In Gods mind, there is no choice. no free will. There simply is or is not.
Thus within His mind we have no free will. The argument is that we could have chosen no other path than what God sees in His mind.
From our standpoint, however, we behave and react as if we are making choices. Whats so wrong with that?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Stile, posted 07-22-2015 8:46 AM Stile has seen this message but 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