Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Free will vs Omniscience
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 991 of 1444 (880481)
08-06-2020 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 980 by Sarah Bellum
08-04-2020 12:30 PM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Sarah Bellum writes:
What would you say if I claimed that the cuckoo in the clock, despite being built by its creator who controlled the arrangement of every tiny piece in its construction, still has free will?
Of course you would say that, because the creater of the cuckoo controlled every little piece of wood and metal, every wire and cogwheel in the mechanism, the cuckoo had no choice but to crow at the appointed time.
But... I wouldn't say that.
If the cuckoo clock bird really does have free will... then it is not crowing at the appointed time because it's forced to, it's doing so because it chooses to.
Then, it's just like a person.
Why wouldn't it be?
But you would not say the bird has free will, because the creator designed the mechanism. You would not say, "Even though we predicted the crowing of the bird, it still has free will to do so or not."
It's a simply test:
If the cuckoo bird is crowing because the cuckoo bird is deciding to do so on it's own accord without outside influence - then the cuckoo bird is exercising free will.
Just like people.
You're the one that suddenly gave an unconscious, "does not have a brain" object free will by definition.
Therefore - you're the one introducing all the confusion into this example.
If the cuckoo is choosing to crow, from free will, on each and every hour and acts exactly the same as a non-free-willed-normal-cuckoo-clock... it would still have free will. We just might not be able to test/know/verify it.
Why wouldn't it?
It is the same with an all-knowing, all-powerful creator of an entire universe. You seem to think of the creator as a farmer raising chickens, with a rooster that may crow whenever it decides to. But that farmer isn't all-knowing or all-powerful.
Your track record for identifying what I think isn't very good.
I don't think you know what I'm trying to say at all - your example doesn't seem to display anything.
Perhaps you should try reading my posts again and coming at it from another angle?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 980 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-04-2020 12:30 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 993 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-06-2020 2:38 PM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 992 of 1444 (880483)
08-06-2020 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 981 by Tangle
08-04-2020 12:31 PM


Tangle writes:
All you people who think they have this thing you call freewill, can you tell me whether you feel capable of shooting a child in the head tomorrow?
Yes, I do.
Forgetting whether our secular society and your god's justice systems would frown on it, could you do it?
Yes, I could.
A robot could do it - the very thing that you claim we would be if we had no free will. A psychopath could do it - they actually do possess free will; they are not hampered by any sense of inborn and learnt empathy, so if they wanted to, they could.
I am not a robot or a psychopath, and I would fee terrible about it.
But, I could do it.
Say, if the baby had a terminal illness and was going to live in pain for the next 30 days... and if I shot it in the head right now, my wife would be able to survive for another 40 years (otherwise... she dies tomorrow.)
A strange situation... but if it happened, I would be capable and could do as you suggest.
Personally my free will to do many of the things that are morally wrong - stealing, raping, pillaging etc - I am incapable of.
I have not found a situation in reality where I can identify the difference of "being incapable of" doing something vs. "choosing not to do it" scientifically.
Have you?
If not - this poses a problem for your line-of-thought.
Free will is a religious fiction.
Maybe it is.
But maybe it's not.
We don't really (scientifically) know yet. No one does.
And just as a fun aside, why would a being that knows everything - past, present and future - even bother to create anything?
Yeah - I certainly agree with the sillyness of this

This message is a reply to:
 Message 981 by Tangle, posted 08-04-2020 12:31 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 995 by Tangle, posted 08-06-2020 3:13 PM Stile has replied
 Message 997 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 3:59 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied
 Message 1020 by Phat, posted 08-12-2020 2:35 PM Stile has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 993 of 1444 (880484)
08-06-2020 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 991 by Stile
08-06-2020 2:25 PM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
You write
quote:
If the cuckoo is choosing to crow, from free will, on each and every hour and acts exactly the same as a non-free-willed-normal-cuckoo-clock... it would still have free will. We just might not be able to test/know/verify it.
Why wouldn't it?
Are you seriously suggesting that the wood and springs contraption that pops out of the cuckoo clock might have free will?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 991 by Stile, posted 08-06-2020 2:25 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 994 by Stile, posted 08-06-2020 2:54 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 994 of 1444 (880486)
08-06-2020 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 993 by Sarah Bellum
08-06-2020 2:38 PM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Ah - I think it was I that was confused.
Here, this is what I thought. Your question:
Sarah Bellum writes:
What would you say if I claimed that the cuckoo in the clock, despite being built by its creator who controlled the arrangement of every tiny piece in its construction, still has free will?
I thought you meant this in the sense that your were "claiming this as a definitional idea and wanted to make a point about it..."
That is, you were claiming that the cuckoo does, indeed, have free because it's an imaginary idea of one that you've made up and you're chosen to define it as specifically having free will.
I thought you were doing this because it's what I'm doing... I'm specifically claiming God can create a universe in a certain way so as to keep us having our free will because I'm imagining (defining...) a way God could do this.
Then I thought you were going to apply this idea to mine somehow.
In this context - yes, I was seriously suggesting that the wood and springs contraption might have free will because, according to this context, you specifically defined it to have such.
However... this isn't what you meant by the phrase.
You meant "if I claim that the cuckoo has free will - then how do you know it doesn't?"
My answer to that, is: What do you mean by "free will" and why do you think something without consciousness/a-brain would be able to have it?
Once we have an answer to that... then we can answer your question.
The fundamental, common answer would be "if it isn't conscious - it's not making decisions, and therefore cannot have free will"
To then answer your original question in the context you intended it (I hope?):
Sarah Bellum writes:
It is the same with an all-knowing, all-powerful creator of an entire universe. You seem to think of the creator as a farmer raising chickens, with a rooster that may crow whenever it decides to. But that farmer isn't all-knowing or all-powerful.
Exactly.
That farmer isn't all-knowing.
Just like the God I'm defining.
I'll say it, again:
This God is not all-knowing.
There is a moment where this God does not know the choices we'll make.
God allows this so that we can have free will.
Then, once we make our choices, God can then see the results of those choices.
Then, God can create a physical universe reflecting our choices (not God's - He didn't know what the answers would be.)
Within the physical universe - God is then all-knowing.
All knowing about non-free-willed-things because He decided how to create rocks and water and things.
All knowing about free-willed-things because He let us decide, but He then sees what that decision would be (like watching a recording.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 993 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-06-2020 2:38 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 999 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-08-2020 6:43 PM Stile has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 995 of 1444 (880487)
08-06-2020 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 992 by Stile
08-06-2020 2:31 PM


Stile writes:
Yes, I do.... Yes, I could.... I could do it....
And then
if ...
You could do it if... That's not the requirement. Can you do it just like putting out the trash? If you could you have free will and you're a psychopath.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 992 by Stile, posted 08-06-2020 2:31 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1014 by Stile, posted 08-12-2020 8:22 AM Tangle has replied

  
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1309 days)
Posts: 332
Joined: 07-25-2020


Message 996 of 1444 (880527)
08-07-2020 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 976 by Sarah Bellum
08-04-2020 10:02 AM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
What is "free will" then? If I build a cuckoo clock and watch it sound the hour at 1:00 and make a video of that action, have I "recorded" the bird's exercise of its free will?
Free will is a personal, objectivre, "feeling". If you feel free, you are free. It does not matter if your freedom is actually controlled by any undetectable higher power. However, if you are sensitive enough to detect any controlling power on you, then you certainly will feel that you are not free.
In your example, you have to ask the feeling of the bird.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 976 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-04-2020 10:02 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1000 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-08-2020 6:45 PM Juvenissun has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 997 of 1444 (880565)
08-07-2020 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 992 by Stile
08-06-2020 2:31 PM


Being Incapable vs Choosing
Stile writes:
I have not found a situation in reality where I can identify the difference of "being incapable of" doing something vs. "choosing not to do it" scientifically.
It is my understanding that Christians can sin and still do sin after they are "saved". By definition, being saved equates to becoming in communion with the Holy Spirit vs simply knowing about the concept. I do not believe that everyone is born "saved". Critics may say that one turnoff they have about Christianity is the idea of exclusivity. I will argue that the only real exclusivity is the exclusivity of the Holy Spirit over all other spirits, gods, and ideologies.
But we all are capable of doing anything. Tangle argues that we are not, and I can see his argument also. I would never think of harming a child. I would never think of punching my 97 year old mother in the face. I will amit that when some arrogant or uncaring adult cuts me off in traffic, I am thinking of what I want to do to them for at least a few seconds after they violate my space---but I have never engaged in road rage. I think that the main difference between being saved and unsaved is the degree of awareness. An unsaved person sees no more awareness towards the spaghetti monster than they do Jesus or Allah. They may, however, lean towards the evidence based trust in science. Science is useful in the materialistic plane. It can critically evaluate anything you use the methodology towards.
Perhaps this is why jar advocates throwing God away. He, like ringo, sees the message as the main thing rather than the messenger. I do not see it this way.(Or Him)

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
- Criss Jami, Killosophy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 992 by Stile, posted 08-06-2020 2:31 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 998 by Juvenissun, posted 08-07-2020 7:03 PM Phat has not replied

  
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1309 days)
Posts: 332
Joined: 07-25-2020


Message 998 of 1444 (880585)
08-07-2020 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 997 by Phat
08-07-2020 3:59 PM


Re: Being Incapable vs Choosing
Stile writes:
I have not found a situation in reality where I can identify the difference of "being incapable of" doing something vs. "choosing not to do it" scientifically.
It depends on how much you (scientifically) understand the person. If you do, then it is quite easy to tell.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 997 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 3:59 PM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1015 by Stile, posted 08-12-2020 8:30 AM Juvenissun has not replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 999 of 1444 (880637)
08-08-2020 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 994 by Stile
08-06-2020 2:54 PM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Interesting! A god of the classical sort, a powerful being but not the decider of destiny.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 994 by Stile, posted 08-06-2020 2:54 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1016 by Stile, posted 08-12-2020 8:44 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1000 of 1444 (880638)
08-08-2020 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 996 by Juvenissun
08-07-2020 7:54 AM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Interesting idea. But suppose you didn't feel that you had free will. A dog, for example, wouldn't even understand (or so we believe) the concept of free will. But the dog could certainly make choices. Could you have free will even if you didn't think you did?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 996 by Juvenissun, posted 08-07-2020 7:54 AM Juvenissun has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1001 by Juvenissun, posted 08-08-2020 7:45 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1309 days)
Posts: 332
Joined: 07-25-2020


(1)
Message 1001 of 1444 (880641)
08-08-2020 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1000 by Sarah Bellum
08-08-2020 6:45 PM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Could you have free will even if you didn't think you did?
Of course you can. If you realize that the high power which can control you does not really hinder ANYTHING you want to do. Won't you feel really FREE in that case?
I don't think a trained dog will feel free.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1000 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-08-2020 6:45 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1002 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-09-2020 11:05 AM Juvenissun has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


(1)
Message 1002 of 1444 (880678)
08-09-2020 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 1001 by Juvenissun
08-08-2020 7:45 PM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
On the other hand, you might think you have free will when you really didn't. People have all kinds of feelings that do not match reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1001 by Juvenissun, posted 08-08-2020 7:45 PM Juvenissun has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1003 by Phat, posted 08-09-2020 7:10 PM Sarah Bellum has replied
 Message 1005 by Juvenissun, posted 08-09-2020 9:34 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1003 of 1444 (880707)
08-09-2020 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1002 by Sarah Bellum
08-09-2020 11:05 AM


Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Sarah Bellum writes:
On the other hand, you might think you have free will when you really didn't. People have all kinds of feelings that do not match reality.
True. And being that we are in a Faith & Belief Forum, reality can include the philosophy of the belief. The jury is forever out on whether belief equates to objective reality.
Two points.
  • When Lucifer chose autonomy rather than obedience, he lost any free will that he once had. One reason is is because he is not free to be God. At best, he can fool people into thinking that he is (or that they are). Thus in regards to human free will, we are also limited in that we can not decide to do or be something or somebody that God is unaware that we will choose to pursue.
  • I really want you to at least see this scripture the way that I do. Everyone is obviously free to disagree with my interpretation.
    Rev 1:4-5 writes:
    Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.
    If John wrote Revelation, he would have known the incarnate Christ as well as the Spirit which essentially represents the crucified Christ alive forever.
    Rev 1:8 writes:
    "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."
    Was before time began and before the very universe was formed/created. Was before our imaginations. Is eternally.
    Rev 1:17-18 writes:
    "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18 I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.
    Do not be afraid. Fear not. For God has not given us a spirit of fear but (a Spirit) of power, love, and a sound mind. Tangle and ringo might argue that any God, character named Jesus, and Spirit are in fact limited to the book. Thus, God, Jesus, and the Spirit are products of the mind of the author. I would disagree, citing the very book itself in saying that Jesus was with God in the Beginning and through Him all things were created. All universes. All books. And all humans with their own imaginations. Potter helped me to be able to better describe my beliefs.
    What jar, ringo and others cant understand but most definitely don't believe is that there is a remnant within mainstream Christianity...perhaps no more than 20%, who are in Communion with the Spirit(the comforter) of the living God (alive in the sense that the Son lives eternally and that a human understands what life and death are. ) Thus God never died but Jesus did. God is beyond terms like life and death but Jesus isn't. Jesus is essentially Gods character incarnate. Keep in mind, however, that there are some things that only the Father (GOD Creator of all seen and unseen) knows that the Son refers to His Father on. As Potter would say, Jesus is 100% humanity and 100% divinity. Whether or not all humans will rise from the dead is yet to be seen, but we think that some will go unto eternal life and some will die, just as the branches cut from the vine that produced no fruit died and are burned.
    Now Sarah...granted this is simply my belief. I wont stand on a soapbox and tell everyone that God told me anything nor will I listen to any one or group of apologists in order to mimic their message. My intuition plus my reading and study allow me to form my belief, and it is highly insulting when some critically thinking skeptic such as jar comes along and attempts to discredit any validity beyond claiming I merely make shit up. His message is not received by many at all, and appeals only to fellow evidence based critical thinking skeptics who likely will remain skeptics and never take the step of faith to bec ome believers out of fear of appearing ridiculous to themselves or others. The one encouragement that I have for him and them is that God likely will weigh the evidence just as Judge Caprio does in Providence RI and accept them anyway.

    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
    ***
    We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.- Francis A. Schaeffer
    The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.
    - Criss Jami, Killosophy

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 1002 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-09-2020 11:05 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1004 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-09-2020 9:04 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    Sarah Bellum
    Member (Idle past 596 days)
    Posts: 826
    Joined: 05-04-2019


    Message 1004 of 1444 (880711)
    08-09-2020 9:04 PM
    Reply to: Message 1003 by Phat
    08-09-2020 7:10 PM


    Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
    I really couldn't say much as to the different views of free will in the Christian church.
    In fact, I still wonder what "free will" really means. We are all matter and energy, which follows certain natural laws as to motion, reactions, change etc. So in the same sense that the Moon will circle the Earth in a predictable orbit, it seems that humans have no free choice, but are merely mechanisms that will follow predictable paths, should anyone have the computational power to predict the motions of their atoms. On the other hand, there are some events, such as the decay of an atomic nucleus, that seem entirely random, meaning there is no prediction possible and perhaps, by extension, our own actions are not determined and may not be subject to free will either, but are merely random.
    And then, on the third hand as it were, there's Chaos theory, which tells us even if our physical bodies are deterministic, that makes no nevermind anyway!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1003 by Phat, posted 08-09-2020 7:10 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    Juvenissun
    Member (Idle past 1309 days)
    Posts: 332
    Joined: 07-25-2020


    Message 1005 of 1444 (880713)
    08-09-2020 9:34 PM
    Reply to: Message 1002 by Sarah Bellum
    08-09-2020 11:05 AM


    Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
    On the other hand, you might think you have free will when you really didn't. People have all kinds of feelings that do not match reality.
    As I said, if you feel you have, then you have. Until you feel you don't have, then you don't have.
    I know I have free will because I feel so. Even I know God is in absolute control of me.
    Tonight, I can choose to have chicken or beef. You tell me why don't I have free will?
    Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1002 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-09-2020 11:05 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1006 by Sarah Bellum, posted 08-10-2020 9:17 AM Juvenissun has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024