Free will vs Omniscience

I was more referring to this understanding of determinism: ...that is, here, "determinism" basically means "following the physical process that came from the initial conditions" as opposed to "free will" meaning "decided by a person, using their thoughts/feelings/experiences."Saying "from the universe" was just a short form at that point.

Right, that's how I'm using the term."Our nature forces us to respond to external forces in our own individual ways" = "the universe unfolding it's physical conditions"
They would just be "our" physical conditions, is all.As opposed to "free will" which is more something along the lines of "making the decision process individually based on our own thoughts/ideas/feelings/experiences of the situation."The point, I think, is to differentiate between a person actually deciding to make a choice (free will) vs. never actually making an individual "choice," and we're just doing whatever it is we must do because of the actual conditions at that specific instance (determinism).That's how I was using the word "determinism," anyway.

I suppose that would depend on what you mean by "influencing" our choices.I mean, my wife influences my choices, but I still have free will.
Couldn't God as well influence my choices, but I still have free will?I agree if by "influence" you mean something along the lines of playing with my mind without my permission. This is how I see it:If God created the universe with full knowledge of everything that was going to happen... then we don't have free will.However, if God created the universe without full knowledge of everything that was going to happen (on purpose, even)... then we can have free will even though God (at this point in time) can know the future.Both cases seem plausible by an "omnipresent, omnipotent" God to me. I think this is the most likely description of our reality.
I'm just defending that the option of God knowing the future doesn't have to mean we have no free will. That is, if God didn't-know-the-future for at least some time between the creation of the universe and now.

Yes. In fact, this is imperative to my defense of the argument.
If it wasn't predetermined... then the one "seeing the future" wouldn't be able to see it.The point is simply that the "predetermination" is because of a personal, individual choice. Not because we're simply following some cause-and-affect flow of events that are pre-determined without our input. Yes, you would be able to choose something different (I would think, anyway). When do you experience it? In the present, where we experience all things.
When did the choice take place? At the creation of the universe. Why can't that opportunity actually happen at the creation of the universe and you're only experiencing it in the present? In my idea, the future would be locked in place as well (from the beginning of the universe, after all choices for all time are created.) I don't see how this is impossible if the events were created when the universe was created and you're simply experiencing the mistake as we travel through the present. Okay, if you think this describes my position I have no problem with it.
However, I was never "taking a compatibilist position" purposefully because I didn't even know the word existed when I started explaining my position.
Also, I haven't "steared away from determinism" on purpose either.
In fact, my position hasn't changed at all, perhaps my explanation is becoming clearer and clearer to you... I just want you to understand that I'm still explaining the exact same position, and it seems to be your understanding of that position using these terms that is changing. Not that it really matters, but perhaps that could help the understanding a bit more.That is... I'm attempting to defend how I think it's possible that God could know the future while free will is preserved.I understand that "determinism, compatibilist and incompatibilist" are terms associated with these sorts of discussion, but I am not concerned with having this idea I'm describing fit into any or all of them. That's all I'm saying That it's possible to have God know the future and we also have free will.I don't care if anyone else calls that deterministic or compatibilist or parts are this and others are that... I attempted to use the terms as they were brought up, but I don't think I understand them well enough to use them effectively in attempting to describe the idea I wanted to get across. Fair enough. I think in my attempts to use the terms as they came up, I used them incorrectly and caused confusion as to the idea I was actually trying to convey. In hindsight... I should have stayed away from those terms completely even after they were introduced. Because, in what I'm trying to explain, that's how the universe works. You simply *feel* like you're making the choice in the present. However, you're actually only *experiencing* the choice in the present. It was actually made, by you, with the entire universe (and all of time) when the universe was created. Correct. It isn't you *from your perspective*.
But the way the universe works doesn't depend upon your perspective.
I'm explaining how my idea could actually be possible. I'm not attempting to explain how you're forced to understand it how you want to from your perspective.From a certain perspective, a 2D square can appear as a line. This doesn't make the square a line.
From *your perspective* you're making the choices now (as you experience them). The doesn't change the fact ("fact" according to my idea, anyway) that you actually made the choice when time was created during the creation of the universe.

And I'm talking about a universe where we've made all the decisions, so therefore the future is knowable.If we're the ones with all the power who freely made all our decisions, how are we "powerless to change it?"The idea I'm talking about... you have as much "power to change things" as you're talking about. It's just that all the decisions were made when the universe was created. All of time, all of the universe was created whenever/however-the-universe-was-created.From there, we're simply experiencing things now. You're acting as if "new information" can be added to the universe that doesn't exist in "all of time."
Can you explain how something can happen "in time" that is not a part of "all time?"If something could happen to you, at some point in time, in this universe... it was created along with the rest of the universe when the universe was created.At the creation of the universe, you (along with everyone else) made all your decisions based on all the information that you would ever gain throughout the entire universe.Now, we're just experiencing all those items.So, the future is knowable.That's how God can see the future, and we still have free will. The universe was created (and God did not know the outcome). Then the universe exists, and God can see what we've all decided. We're just experiencing it slower than God can, is all.Can future-information be transmitted to us?The question kind of loses meaning when you look at a universe with all time created at the creation of the universe.
What is "future" or "past" in a universe like this? It's like "left" and "right" of a piece of lumber. Just walk to the other side and "left" and "right" are reversed. In universe where all of time is created at the beginning... "future" and "past" have no anchored meaning.But if we try to force the nonsensical phrasing onto the idea, I would guess at these three options: Can future-information be transmitted to us?

• Perhaps this is impossible. (God cannot "talk" to us, but could still see our future while we have free-will)
• Perhaps it's possible, but would then shatter the universe. (Someone can see the future, and we have free-will, but if future-information... "external-to-the-universe information"... is forced into the universe... the universe shatters)
• Perhaps it's possible and would be integrated into the beginning of the universe when all of time and all universe-related-events were created such that the outcome is still just-being-played-out as everything else is. (Someone can see the future, and inform us, and we react, but this is all a-part-of-our-universe so it's all integrated and contained and created at the beginning of the universe along with everything else).

Ha ha. This is exactly what I've been defining the whole thread... you did exist when the universe was created.We all did, everyone (ever) did, and everything did too. The entire universe existed at the creation of the universe. That's what "the creation of the universe" is. Time is just another dimension like the others. When ALL of space was created, ALL of time was created too. From the beginning to the end. We're just experiencing it now. What are you talking about?
The "you" at the creation of the universe is even more "you" than the play-through you're simply experiencing now. That's the 'you' that made all the decisions. It's not like there's 2 of you... there's only you. And of course you're culpable for the decisions you make. Who else would be making them?You seem to be implying that "more information" is being added to your brain during the course of the universe, or something like that.
In the idea I'm talking about, all that information was accessible to you at the beginning of the universe, and you made your decisions at that point. Now, you're simply experiencing them in a strange way as we travel through the timeline of this now-static universe.

But... there's not.It's my idea so I get to define how it works.
You may "perceive" it or "feel" like this is the way it is... but it's not the way it is.Sort of in a "how can you know if we're brains in jars or not?" situation. You can't tell, it's currently impossible. Therefore, I'm defining a possible idea from there.So, it's one you, and that's it. There is no separate, distinct "experience-ing you." The you who is doing the experiencing is the same one who made the decisions at the beginning of the universe.Like recording your own voice. You said something... and a recording can replay it. The recording isn't some "other you..." it's you.
You can "feel like" the recording the someone else (and it may even sound different from what you think your voice sounds like) but it's no someone else, it's you. But that's a part of the universe. Therefore, it happened when the universe was created. That's not what's going on, though.
What you're experiencing now is not gaining any new information. You're simply going over a recording from when you made the decisions in the first place... from the beginning of the universe.
You feel like the information is new to you now... but it's just a feeling, you had the same information when you made the decision at the beginning of the universe.The difference between how you think of the universe now and the idea I'm describing is more like a simple time-delay. It's not changing anything at all, it doesn't make any difference at all. This isn't how it works.
You're not describing the idea I'm defining.Any sort of "realizing that it hurts to touch the flame of a candle and you don't want to do that anymore" would have happened at the beginning of the universe. Your decision on the information would have been made then.The 'experiencing now' is a playback... a recording. The universe is no longer creating itself, you are simply living out the decisions you made at the creation of the universe. Of course you did, at the beginning of the universe. Maybe try to think of it this way:Right now, Cat Sci should understand this:Past - NothingPresent:
1. Touch candle.
2. Feel heat.
3. Make decision.Future: Based on "present" information.And update this to the next dayPast: "Candle hurt"
Present: "Another Candle - don't touch"
Future: Based on "present" information.And update this to the next dayNow, look to yesterday and see that you cannot change 'the past' you cannot change that you decided to not touch the flame at this point.Transfer into my idea:Think of the Universe being created and time going insanely-fast such that the entire universe is played out in just a few "seconds."
You would have seen a flame, felt the heat, and then decided to not touch the second flame (or whatever decision you freely made).
Then... once the universe is created, you get to experience these decisions in the "now" as we live our lives.
For billions of years you experience nothing.
Then you finally get to experience seeing a flame, feeling the heat and deciding not to touch the second flame.At this point of "experience" your "decision" is already in the past, already made. So, like the above Cat-Sci-understanding... you can't change the decision you made yesterday... Here, you can't change the decision you made when the universe was created.Same amount of power to change your mind freely when you make the decision.
(Cat-Sci-understanding - yesterday)
(My idea - beginning of the universe)Same amount of inability to 'get new information' so you can change your mind about 'the past' after the decision is made.
(Cat-Sci-understanding - today, looking at yesterday)
(My idea - the experience of 'the present')It's exactly the same cause-and-effect structure, just a different definition on the actual timing of things, that's all. A very important point.
Even for my idea, there still needs to be "a time" where God did not know the future.
For Cat-Sci-understanding... this is "the future."
For my idea... this is "the creation of the universe."Obviously, you have no problems with God "knowing yesterday (the past)".
In my idea... God is simply "knowing yesterday" before you get to experience it. You already went through it, and did it (at the beginning of the universe), you simply don't have a current, conscience memory of it... that's the "experiencing" part.I fully admit that this is not very intuitive.
I fully admit that it's not likely (and I don't even personally think it's the way things are).But... just 'cause we don't find it comforting, or likely, or intuitive... doesn't make it impossible.

But it's not another "time around."It's just one go, one creation of the universe.
You can do whatever you can there as you can with the idea that we're making the decisions in "the present." Yes, I understand.
That's goes back to my previous post where I explained a few options that boiled down to:-might be impossible
-might be possible but shatter the universe
-might be just fine and-be-entirely-contained-at-the-beginning-of-the-universe as wellSort of like asking the question of reading the future right now.Can anyone actually read our future, is it possible?
Would it destroy our reality?
Would it be just fine and become incorporated as a part of our reality?We're talking about "reading the future..." on some level it's all just fantasy-made-up-stuff until anyone comes up with any real evidence. Why not?
Because it's not intuitive as to how you think this universe actually works?Why must things actually be happening "right now?"
Why can't things have happened a long time ago and you're simply along for the ride at this point, even though it feels like they're happening right now? This makes no sense.I started using the word "experiencing" in the present to differentiate between actually making the decision in the past (at the beginning of the universe) and just watching the playthrough of it now.Now you seem to be forcing a definition of the word "experiencing" that means you're making the decision in the present, again.Hijacking my word and re-defining it does not change the idea I'm expressing.
It is understandable, however, because this is not an "intuitive" idea.I'll try to explain again.You go through the full "decision making/experiencing/information gathering/free will life" you consider to be "the present" all at once... at the creation of the universe when all of time is created.The sensation you're getting now, is simply a play-back of the movie-of-your-life you've already made.You're not getting "new information right now" that wasn't available to you when you made the decision at the beginning of the universe.Think of someone's last birthday.
They were happy and got drunk while hanging out with friends.If we have a video of that, we could play it over and over.The video would show that person being happy and getting drunk with friends over and over.It doesn't "gain information."
"Movie-guy" can't say... "hey, I don't want to get anymore drunk tonight, I'm going to stop drinking at 10pm instead..." because the decision to get drunk and hang out with friends was already made (freely).It's nonsense to think of "movie-guy" as a separate entity.This is (basically) the idea I'm describing.
The decisions and reality were all created in an instant the universe was created.
All of space was created, I'm just saying that (for this idea) all of time was created as well.We're just going through the movie, now.God could re-wind it, fast forward it, play this part, skip to that part... God could know all of it, but it was still created by you and I and everyone else involved during the creation of the universe.Whether or not you like that, or are comfortable with that... is irrelevant to it being a possible idea for how God could read our future while we still have just as much free-will and control-over-our-choices as if we made all our decisions in the present.Try this:Let's say we're making all our decisions in the present, and someone is "recording the universe."
Once the universe is done... completed... dead, maybe or whatever... this "recording" would include all the free-will decisions all of us ever made.That's what I'm talking about, but I'm saying that the universe "being done" is one-fell swoop part of it's creation. As soon as it was created, it was complete, done. And just like someone playing an old-universe-recording... this "reality we're currently experiencing" may be nothing more than a recording of our universe where all the decisions have already been made, freely, under our full control. You're thinking that "present-you" is somehow a separate instance of "beginning of the universe you."I'm saying that's not a part of this idea."Present-you" IS "beginning of the universe you" in the sense that "recorded you" IS "present you" on any video of yourself you've ever seen.When you watch a video of yourself, you don't suddenly get to go back in time and re-make decisions because now you know more... that's not how recordings work. The only thing I'm brutalizing is the amount of comfort you have with feeling like "now" is actually when you're really making your decisions.The amount of free will and full-control-over-your-actions you have in the idea I'm describing is exactly the same. Or 'keeping the recording around' or however you'd like to think of it, yeah.

The creation-and-then-experiencing it and recording-and-playbacks are simply two different ways of attempting to explain the same thing.I don't understand what you mean by "but now it's all at once."The decisions you make have always been "all at once" in this idea - when the universe was created, and all of time was created... this would be the "recording."Your experience/feeling/sensation of it in the present would be the "playback."

Right.You seemed to suggest that during the playback (when you're experiencing it) you should be able to "make another decision" that what you did at the beginning of the universe.This is where it's all "one thing."If you record yourself and play it back, you don't get to remake decisions you made during the recording... the playback isn't a "2nd you" running through the scenario again who can decide this or that differently.There's only one time where the decisions happen... during the recording... during the creation of the universe.The present moment playback "experience of the present" can be looked at as the ultimate playback of the recording.
You get sight, smell, taste, feelings... you go through the entire experience of the moment.But... it's still a playback, not some sort of feedback loop.All of time was created at the beginning of the universe, the 'present time' is simply how we (for whatever reason) experience the universe.Think of a kajillion years in the future from now... the universe ends. And some God has the ability to play it back.
As they play it back, you go through and experience your life again (however, as you're simply a recording, you have no knowledge that it's a "playback").The decisions you made were as free as you consider them to be right now.
You have as much control over your actions as you consider to have right now.During this playback, the God could fast-forward and see your "future" - relative to your "current experience" in the playback.
God would be able to see your future while you still have as much free will in your decisions and control over your actions as you have right now.This describes a universe as you think of it... taking "a kajillion" years to "create the universe and all of time" and then a God plays it back.I'm just changing the time-line. I'm saying maybe the universe and all of time was created "all at once, whenever it was created" and we're simply going through a playback of it right now... experiencing all the decisions we freely made and experiencing all the control we had over our actions.

Exactly.And it is only "not really you" because you have decided to define it that way.Granted, the way "you have chosen to define it" is the generally accepted perception of it.
But that's what I've been openly brutalizing this whole time... the "generally accepted perception"... which doesn't really mean much. But... the guy who has the experience is the one who makes the decision.You simply seem to be uncomfortable with the "time-delay" between the making of the decision and the playback of it.But, if the playback has no input, no output, no feedback, no consciousness-of-it's-own... I don't understand how you think any of the "meat-and-potatoes" of the decision-making/free-will/control-over-your-actions part is affected. Can you give the "meaningful sense of the word" so we could discuss it?From what I can tell, the "meaningful sense of the word" is the free-will-decision/control-over-your-actions/no-external-influence kind of thing. That is all perfectly preserved. No, it's simply a change in perception for how time works within our universe.Would you say that your free will today is removed because a God "a kajillion years" from now, after the universe is ended watches a replay of the decisions you're making today?If your answer is "no." Then you're beginning to understand what I'm talking about.In order to keep your issues with my concept consistent... you'll have to answer "yes" and explain how your free will is removed in that sort of scenario. And you did. At the creation of the universe.
You're simply playing it through again now.
Maybe you'll play it though again and again and again.If you watch a recording of yourself over and over, the recorded-you doesn't suddenly get deja-vu and start talking to the camera about how many times he has to go through this. Recorded-you simply has no knowledge of being played over and over again. To recorded-you, it's the exact same experience as the first time. Same sights, same sounds, same thoughts, same decisions. Decisions that were freely made and recorded-you had total control over when they were recorded. To make your objection clearer, can you identify where along the line your free will is changed or altered if we consider a God reviewing this universe of yours after it's ended?Is your free-will (soul?) captured every time someone takes your picture?

As far as the topic goes, your entire 3-part understanding either includes free-will or not depending on how this "creation" went.Was there ever a moment (perhaps before the creation, perhaps during it..) where the Creator did not know the future of the creation?If yes - then I can logically see free will fitting in. Perhaps just un-intuitively, as my idea suggests.If no - then I cannot see a way free will could actually fit in. This would imply a creator thinking up our futures... and then creating them and "so it shall be." Such a mechanical creation seems to eliminate the possibility for free will, as I understand it. I hope the above answers your question in context to this topic.If you're looking for something beyond the mere presence of free will... if your understanding makes sense in general... it's not something I have knowledge of Personally, to me, from my experience... no, it all sounds a bit... created-by-man.
But, so does my idea of forcing the existence of free-will into a universe where it's possible to know the future.Can it make logical sense? I guess so... as much as we can say it does without knowing how a universe "logically" comes into being anyway.Does it make reasonable sense?
I think the way Cat Sci is explaining free will (the present is a fundamental reality of how time works, and therefore no one... not even a God... can "see the future" without removing free will). Is the most likely candidate of how things actually work. All the evidence we have seems to fit this picture, and it's the simplest picture without adding unnecessary elements.Both my idea of free-will-with-the-ability-of-knowing-the-future and your understanding-presented-here include aspects that must be assumed simply to make the ideas work. There's no evidence for my idea that "we're playing back a recording" and there's no evidence for the existence of God, Jesus or a "Beast." There's nothing logically ruling them out... as long as they exist in some as-yet-undiscovered (or even beyond-our-ability-to-discover) form. But invoking the unknown isn't generally a good way to go about understanding reality. It's merely a tool to keep our minds aware of the fact that we don't know everything... this helps leave us open to the possibility of being wrong... which allows us to move onto a closer-to-the-truth explanation when/if new information comes along.If you want to seriously pursue either idea as an actual aspect of reality (other than a though-experiment simply to prove a logically possible point)... then I would suggest the next step is to figure out a way to find evidence to back the idea.You would need to devise a test of some sort.
Some way to differentiate between "being a recording" vs. "not being a recording."
Or a way to tell the difference between "a Beast indeed exists" vs. "a universe where no Beast exists."If you could develop such tests, and run them, and the result happens to be what you're looking for... then you have the beginnings of a foundation for showing that such ideas are actually a part of reality.Without such tests, unfortunately, these ideas must remain in the realm of "playful imaginings of things that are not impossible."

I agree with this statement. An observation implies that one does not know what will happen... that they are watching to find out and see.Is God "observing" you? Or is God watching you play out the programming He put into your life at creation?When God created you with full knowledge of your entire life... did the idea of your entire life enter God's mind at some point? Can you say it *came from you* in any way?
Or did God think up a man who will be doing x, y and z throughout their lives... and then make that happen?The first way implies that God (at some point in time) did not have full knowledge of your life. This way, I can see free-will being preserved.The second way implies that God thought up and programmed a robot. You're simply running through the programming God initially desired. This does not conform to any definition of free will I could accept.

Ha ha
Phat, the trick is... nobody "get's it."The secrets to life, the universe and everything?
The Bible doesn't have the answers.
I don't have the answers.
You don't have the answers.
Science doesn't have the answers.
Religion doesn't have the answers.
No one and no body of knowledge ever collected by humans has ever had the answers.If the answers to that were known, we would not be asking these questions... they would already be answered.Therefore, if you're going to offer a solution... you're going to have to back it up with a bit more than "this is my interpretation of the Bible."Many people have their own interpretation of the Bible.
Many people have their own interpretation of the scientific ideas.
Many people have their own interpretation of their own experiences.Until any of it is shown to be valid in any way at all... we're all in the same, empty boat. Maybe.Maybe not.But none of this helps us determine if God can create us with full knowledge of who we are and what we're going to do and preserve free will or not.

The evidence of everyday life.
The evidence that no testing has ever produced someone (or something) that can predict the future in any meaningful way.
The evidence that the universe has a speed limit.
The evidence that time travels in one direction. I'm not.
I never claimed to be able to determine exactly how free will works.I claimed that the evidence we have "fits the picture" of no one being able to read the future.
That could be because no one can because it's impossible.
That could be because we just don't know how yet.
That could be because it's impossible for humans, but not impossible for some other being.But it's the easiest, most parsimonious explanation right now.
That's all I'm claiming. I'm not claiming that it's right. In fact, if you read my posts on the subject, I'm claiming that we can't even run meaningful tests on it right now because we can't seem to think up any that would lead to conclusive results. I have no idea.
But I never claimed to be able to, or that such a thing is a requirement in general, either. Agreed. Wording this statement another way, one could say that "observation 'seems to fit the picture' that no one can read the future and that we have free will." Huh... looks like we agree. Fully agreed, in fact... I said it before you did I'm not.
Never have.
I'm at a loss as to how you could read even a few posts of mine in this 450+ message thread and get that impression.

It doesn't.
It addresses the question of having evidence that "fits the picture" for free will existing because no one can read the future.
Which is what we were talking about for that evidence.
Why would you think it would address something different from what we were talking about?I agree that omniscience is a silly, immature concept. It seems to come from a "my dad is bigger than your dad" child's mentality of a God.If the definition of omniscience includes a being that created the universe while being the source for the ideas of what that universe is going to contain, as well as what all inhabitants are going to "choose" to do... then I do not think omniscience and free will can co-exist.If "omniscience" does not include such a trait. That is, if the choice to do or do not is made by us and simply "observed/described" by an omniscient being (regardless of whether or not that observation is interpreted by us as being in the 'future' or 'past' or whenever...) then I can logically see free will still existing. Although it is in a convoluted, unintuitive, needs-a-lot-of-"just-so"-help imagined scenario. Ha I would go so far as to say those who use the term do not even understand what they're saying.
The idea itself is simply so... all encompassing... that you might as well say "I've counted to a kajillion +1!!" I agree.
Good thing I've never claimed such a thing.Again, my claim is that the evidence we have "fits the picture" of free will existing.I do not claim that free will actually does exist.
I do not claim that free will actually does not exist.
I do not claim to be able to know one way or the other.
I do claim that we are currently unable to know one way or the other.
I do claim that what we do know "fits the picture" of free will existing.Of course, what we do know also "fits the picture" of free will not-existing as well (which is why we don't know either way...).You seem to be taking something from me that was said in the context of "eh, this is my best guess, given what we currently know..." and you're trying to twist it into the context of "it is definitely, absolutely this way!"You're simply mistaken about the context of my statements.
You can re-read my posts and find your error.
You can simply accept this clarification of my own stance in this post and move past your error.
Or you can continue to be wrong about my position.Doesn't make a difference to me. I'm having fun