|
Author
|
Topic: Free will vs Omniscience
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
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.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 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 |
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
(1)
| |
| |
| |
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.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
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.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
I don't know whether or not we have free will. Some things appear to be true (the Earth looks flat from where we stand on it) but turn out not to be true. A flat earth would be perfect to you if you don't have a need to know it is a sphere. It has nothing to do with the truth. I said it several times, we have free will until we find we don't. I don't believe a human being will ever say he is not able to make any free choice at any age of his life. Theologically, the free will issue is focus on whether a person has a free choice to believe or not to believe. On this regard, angel and human both have free will. Other creatures don't.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
But the earth is either flat or it isn't. Whether or not we know that fact is irrelevant. The same goes for free will. Either we have it or we don't. Whether or not we know that fact changes nothing. It will change YOU. In the whole issue, YOU are the most important subject, not anything or anyone else.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
How would one determine if someone or something has free will? If you drop a rock it will fall. It doesn't seem to have a choice, no matter how many times you drop it, it does the same thing. On the other hand, a coin may come up heads or tails when we flip it. There doesn't seem to be any pattern in the sequence of heads and tails if we repeat the experiment. Is the coin choosing what to do? Salmon return to the same spot to spawn. Do they have a choice? A person seems to make a choice, but if we had a supercomputer with enough power and enough data about the chemical composition of that person's brain would we be able to predict what each choice is? Science limits choice. We call that prediction. A salmon would have to make a Free choice if the entrance to the spawn location is blocked. In science fiction, AI would one day be unpredictable. That means the AI system has free choice. A lot of people choose the same thing or the same act, it does not mean each of them does not have free choice. Statistics on human behavior usually has larger deviation. That, shows the fact of free choice. I think you are repeating the same question again and again and not trying or willing to draw a conclusion. I guess that is also a free choice. I won't (choose not to) do that. Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given. Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
The issue of AI is an interesting one. Since a computer is a deterministic thing, a computer should give exactly the same output on the same input. But that would mean an AI, a program run on a computer, if it were to exhibit intelligence (passing the Turing test, for example), would also be deterministic. That is, it wouldn't have free choice.
But if an intelligent entity doesn't have free choice, what would that say about us? After all, our brains are just chemical (rather than electronic) computers. No. Many AI programs NOW are not deterministic already. They may tell you that an idea is only 59% true. Whatever chemical made up a person, the person is ALWAYS more than the total chemicals he has. Free will is one of the extra.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
I didn't mean that the AI couldn't give ambiguous answers. But the answers will always be the same given the same input. It will always tell you that particular idea is 59% true, it won't change its mind.
As for the other issue, a person is more than the chemicals in them, of course, but only in the sense that a painting is more than a collection of pigments. Assuming accurate enough knowledge, wouldn't it be possible to predict, just from the chemical reactions, the "choices" a person might make? And then would those really be choices? Not really. Intelligent AI will give an answer to a question. But could give a different answer to the exactly same question at different time or in different environment, if you put those two factors into consideration. God can't even tell whether a particular human being will eventually believe in Him or not.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
|
|
Message 1031 of 1444 (880861)
08-12-2020 8:25 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1029 by Phat
08-12-2020 4:03 PM
|
|
Re: Tangling With Tangle
For reference, I am currently reading The Conflict Between Authority and Autonomy by Robert Wolfe, in which he evidently proposes logic behind anarchy. There is a math describe Chaos. If a thing follows logic, it has no freedom. Wait, I take it back. Freedom can be quantitized. Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1029 by Phat, posted 08-12-2020 4:03 PM | | Phat has not replied |
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Changing the time or the environment is changing the inputs, of course! However you feel about your children, you're more likely to go out shopping for Christmas presents on 4 December than on 4 July.
But doesn't your god know the future? Doesn't your god know whether or not a each person will choose to believe, and which god they will believe in? The variables involved in an environment, which combined with the variable of time is nearly infinite, and would be hard to specified. Thus if an AI has to consider those factors, it has to learn from examples, not deterministic principles. so each AI system may respond differently to exactly the same input because the interpretation could be different. If God give someone free will, then God can not predict what he will choose. So many people decided NOT to believe God, that shows the existence of free will. Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
|
|
Message 1039 of 1444 (880889)
08-13-2020 12:32 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1034 by Phat
08-13-2020 11:33 AM
|
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Way back in this topic, Message 127, ringo and I were arguing about the idea of God knowing whether or not a person would end up on His side or not.
Looking back on the arguments which I made, I have kept one of them: Message 119... and stand by it as an intrinsic part of my belief in Gods foreknowledge, omnipotance, and allowing for evil (for a time) as part of the overall plan.
jar brought up one of his standard arguments regarding Gods responsibility regarding ultimate foreknowledge. Message 118. I understand that in the Scripture, God does indicate that He knows the outcome of someone's faith. It is true. Ultimately, God is omniscient. God is able to know one's faith outcome, does not mean GOD knows everyone's faith outcome. In majority of cases, I believe God just let the person make this critical choice on himself. If you do know God says that He knows everyone's future on faith, please let me know the verses.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1034 by Phat, posted 08-13-2020 11:33 AM | | Phat has seen this message but not replied |
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
|
|
Message 1040 of 1444 (880896)
08-13-2020 12:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1034 by Phat
08-13-2020 11:33 AM
|
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Lets assume for a moment that my basic belief is correct in that God had foreknowledge of what Lucifer would decide to do and therefore so loved the world that He sent His Son (even before Lucifer chose to rebel) and essentially made an endrun around the devils plot to ensnare humanity through tricking them into willfully accepting the knowledge of good and evil which made them responsible for every good thing and every evil thing which they knowingly chose to do. In this case, God is not responsible for our free will nor on whether we accept Jesus or not(and assuming that to be the antidote for being tricked by Satan) I know that Tangle is simply dismissing all of this religious hoopla, but I might point out that he would follow the hypothetical maths which "prove" that the universe sprang from nothing. He is thus responsible for the belief that he chooses regarding origins, meaning, and destiny. God has a plan to deal with sin right from the beginning. God may not know when and through whom will sin appear. But He knows it will appear. that is why Jesus is there with God. God gives angels and humans free will because He wants to fix the problem of sin from the very very beginning. Without sin, what is wrong to have a full free will in God's Kingdom? Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1034 by Phat, posted 08-13-2020 11:33 AM | | Phat has not replied |
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
The perhaps your god lacks the knowledge about each individual to determine whether or not they deserve to go to heaven upon their deaths?
Perhaps your god lacks the power to send people to heaven or hell? What you said illustrates you lack the basic understanding to Christianity. God set up Heaven and Hell. People use free will to choose which one to go. God does not have to send any human to anywhere.
|
Juvenissun
Member (Idle past 1334 days) Posts: 332 Joined: 07-25-2020
|
Re: Introducing An Old Argument Revisited
Christian God is all powerful by definition. An all powerful God does not mean He wants to know or to control your every choices.
|
™ Version 4.2