Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8943 total)
37 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, Faith, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Pressie (6 members, 31 visitors)
Newest Member: LaLa dawn
Post Volume: Total: 863,949 Year: 18,985/19,786 Month: 1,405/1,705 Week: 211/446 Day: 9/98 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Free will: an illusion
Heathen
Member
Posts: 1063
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 256 of 309 (323947)
06-20-2006 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by iano
06-20-2006 2:25 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
iano writes:

You could chose to look on the bright side however. You could chose to dump this notion that you have no free will.

I do not currently believe that we have no free will.. rather I believe that it is more likely that God (if he exists) does not have omniscience.

I am not convinced of the existance of any god, therefore I am not convinced that my future is foreknown.. therefore I have every reason to believe that my free will truely exists.

iano writes:

Why so mournful? You seem to express a want, a desire, a will. But at the same time you know you haven't got wants, desires and a will - these thoughts are only determined by God.


These are not my actual thoughts.. the point I am trying to make is that IF i believed in God as you define him (A.K.), logically I would have no choice but to assume that my free will is an illusion, a facade.
However, I do not believe in God as You define him.
so for now.. my free will survives intact.

ABE:
This my thought process iano.. I place myself in a position (in this case yours) I try to find s justification for my assumed beliefs.. if I cannot find one.. or if I can find a hole, or a contradiction involved i do not believe.

Edited by Creavolution, : added point


This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 2:25 PM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 3:27 PM Heathen has responded

iano
Member (Idle past 231 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 257 of 309 (323963)
06-20-2006 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by Heathen
06-20-2006 3:02 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
Fair enough. I was dealing with the assumptions we started with and was pointing out that the consequential thinking of that core conclusion ("no free will") can't actually follow from that conclusion

What does the conclusion DO in fact. Do any consequences flow from it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 3:02 PM Heathen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 3:40 PM iano has responded
 Message 281 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-21-2006 10:30 AM iano has responded

Heathen
Member
Posts: 1063
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 258 of 309 (323969)
06-20-2006 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by iano
06-20-2006 3:27 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
iano writes:

...and was pointing out that the consequential thinking of that core conclusion ("no free will") can't actually follow from that conclusion

I guess I'm still not seeing that. any examination of it tells me that No Free will must follow from omniscient or all knowing God.
Sure, the appearance of choice and free will persists at our level. But from the outside (of eternity) we're riding a track.

That is the consequence of an all knowing God as I see it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 3:27 PM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 5:06 PM Heathen has responded

Heathen
Member
Posts: 1063
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 259 of 309 (323990)
06-20-2006 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by New Cat's Eye
06-20-2006 2:11 PM


Re: make a choice free will or All knowing God
dictionary.com:
omni = [Latin, from omnis, all. See op- in Indo-European Roots.]

so.. omni = all. Past, present, future. I don't see how you can apply limits to 'all'
If Gods omniscience does not include the future then it is not OMNIscience. he is not ALL knowing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-20-2006 2:11 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

iano
Member (Idle past 231 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 260 of 309 (323998)
06-20-2006 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Heathen
06-20-2006 3:40 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
Can we work this is one direction: God is all knowing is the assumption and no free will is the consequence. Assuming free will and concluding God is not all knowing is a different issue - for the assumptions have changed.

I guess I'm still not seeing that. any examination of it tells me that No Free will must follow from omniscient or all knowing God.

This is the primary conclusion. I know this is what you hold. My question is what else can be drawn from that. What comment about the 'fairness' of one being saved and the other not. Or asking the question "why should I worship a God like that?"

What sub-conclusions can you draw from the primary one - if any

Edited by iano, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 3:40 PM Heathen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 5:22 PM iano has responded

Heathen
Member
Posts: 1063
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 261 of 309 (324010)
06-20-2006 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by iano
06-20-2006 5:06 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
iano writes:

My question is what else can be drawn from that. What comment about the 'fairness' of one being saved and the other not. Or asking the question "why should I worship a God like that?"


ok.. I'll play along..

wrt Fairness of one being saved and the oether not.. it seems this is not fair nor just. It is completely out of my control, and I will be punsished for something I have no control over. In this scenario it is not my actions or inaction that will damn me to hell.

If we then accept this scenario worship of this all knowing God is obviously misplaced... even if it were our choice.

but of course this is not the only scenario.. we still have the alternative of a less-than-all knowing God

Edited by Creavolution, : quote repair


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 5:06 PM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 5:36 PM Heathen has responded

iano
Member (Idle past 231 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 262 of 309 (324018)
06-20-2006 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by Heathen
06-20-2006 5:22 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
ok.. I'll play along..

Thank you.

wrt Fairness of one being saved and the oether not.. it seems this is not fair nor just. It is completely out of my control,

You have no control for something to be completely outside it.

How does one apply concepts of fairness and justice to God who would is simply exercising his right to deal with products he manufactures. Is is fair to squash a complex play-dough models when one tires of them? Hell being the squashing process

If those thoughts are pre-configured to occur then where do objectivity judgement that something is fair or not come from?

and I will be punsished for something I have no control over.

Punishment implies right and wrong - but you have done no right or wrong you have done what you must do. That concept too must be eliminated

In this scenario it is not my actions or inaction that will damn me to hell.

Damnation too implies punishment.

Can you begin to see that there are no sub-conclusions to be drawn? That there is no 'one' to draw them? That the conclusion is hollow in that is says nothing of use?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 5:22 PM Heathen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 6:35 PM iano has responded
 Message 283 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-21-2006 10:41 AM iano has not yet responded

cavediver
Member (Idle past 1933 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 263 of 309 (324042)
06-20-2006 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by NosyNed
06-20-2006 12:45 PM


Re: Not pre-determined just determined
He shows why the time dimension is just as "there" in its full extent as the 3 space dimensions. The past and the future are all "there" all the "time". There is no "flow of time". There is a fixed past, a fixed now and a fixed future. This seems to remove "free will" as we commonly understand it.

Exactly. All this talk of God's omniscience removing free-will is daft. General Relativity does a much better job...

The universe as far as we understand it to this day is deterministic. It is very hard to imagine any such thing as free-will in such a universe. In my mind, if free-will exists, it is "super-natural" in origin, something added to the universe's natural law. I guess in this respect I hold similar views to Iano's. Personally, given many of the "choices" I have made, I'm quite happy with free-will not existing, in which case I am just along for the ride ;)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by NosyNed, posted 06-20-2006 12:45 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 6:02 PM cavediver has responded
 Message 284 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-21-2006 10:45 AM cavediver has responded

iano
Member (Idle past 231 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 264 of 309 (324047)
06-20-2006 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by cavediver
06-20-2006 5:57 PM


Re: Not pre-determined just determined
The universe as far as we understand it to this day is deterministic.

It's a concept that would blow my mind were it only true. Briefly: assuming it was the case for a moment, wouldn't that mean that initial conditions a long long time ago were such so as to ensure I would type what I am typing now and also that which I will type tomorrow?

Personally, given many of the "choices" I have made, I'm quite happy with free-will not existing,

The very first hints of a person convicted by the holy spirit of their guilt. Heart warming.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by cavediver, posted 06-20-2006 5:57 PM cavediver has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by iano, posted 06-21-2006 9:26 AM iano has not yet responded
 Message 271 by cavediver, posted 06-21-2006 9:38 AM iano has responded

Heathen
Member
Posts: 1063
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 265 of 309 (324070)
06-20-2006 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by iano
06-20-2006 5:36 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
iano writes:

You have no control for something to be completely outside it.


semantics.. I am unable to control it. however you wish to state it.

iano writes:

How does one apply concepts of fairness and justice to God who would is simply exercising his right to deal with products he manufactures. Is is fair to squash a complex play-dough models when one tires of them? Hell being the squashing process


is it fair to send a being to eternal damnation when it has no way to avoid it?

iano writes:

If those thoughts are pre-configured to occur then where do objectivity judgement that something is fair or not come from?


From our point of view it seems we have objectivity or judgement... but do we really? in an all knowing god situation we do not.

iano writes:

Can you begin to see that there are no sub-conclusions to be drawn? That there is no 'one' to draw them? That the conclusion is hollow in that is says nothing of use?


unless, God is NOT All Knowing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 5:36 PM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 7:04 PM Heathen has responded

iano
Member (Idle past 231 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 266 of 309 (324081)
06-20-2006 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by Heathen
06-20-2006 6:35 PM


Re: Que Sera, Sera
You have no control for something to be completely outside it.

This is not semantics. "I have no control..." is a sub-conclusion. Accepting this sub-conclusion you cannot then apply something you haven't got as something which is being overridden by Gods choice.

is it fair to send a being to eternal damnation when it has no way to avoid it?

Another sub-conclusion is that you are a machine. Use the words which your conclusion demands of you. Is it fair to send a machine to the scrap yard when one has no more use for it. You ascribe yourself a value when the sub-conclusion demands you have none in particular. Or at least none other than what the machine maker ascribes it

From our point of view it seems we have objectivity or judgement... but do we really? in an all knowing god situation we do not.

Another sub-conclusion is that we have no point of view. Our view is determined. We will say 'not fair' because that is determined - not because it is actually unfair. We might as easily say it is fair - were we so determined. Even our words are not our own. So why ascribe worth to what they say (sorry for my overuse of the word ascribe)

unless, God is NOT All Knowing.

Another discussion for another day. What we are dealing with is whether "God being all knowing renders our free will an illusion". The answer cannot be Yes.

Edited by iano, : clarify


This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 6:35 PM Heathen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by Heathen, posted 06-21-2006 10:49 AM iano has not yet responded

ramoss
Member
Posts: 3122
Joined: 08-11-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 267 of 309 (324277)
06-21-2006 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 243 by cavediver
06-20-2006 12:44 PM


Re: Is knowing the future enough to destroy free-will?
Yes, you would take away 'free will' if you knew precisely what was going to happen.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by cavediver, posted 06-20-2006 12:44 PM cavediver has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by cavediver, posted 06-21-2006 9:20 AM ramoss has not yet responded

cavediver
Member (Idle past 1933 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 268 of 309 (324279)
06-21-2006 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 267 by ramoss
06-21-2006 9:15 AM


Re: Is knowing the future enough to destroy free-will?
Yes, you would take away 'free will' if you knew precisely what was going to happen.

Then the natural universe is not compatible with free-will according to General Relatvity.

It has nothing to do with God.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by ramoss, posted 06-21-2006 9:15 AM ramoss has not yet responded

iano
Member (Idle past 231 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 269 of 309 (324282)
06-21-2006 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by iano
06-20-2006 6:02 PM


Bump for Cavediver
Bump for the message I am replying to

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by iano, posted 06-20-2006 6:02 PM iano has not yet responded

PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 713
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 270 of 309 (324287)
06-21-2006 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by Heathen
06-20-2006 11:22 AM


Re: make a choice free will or All knowing God
But omniscience based upon extrapolation from what is known, to a 'possible' outcome does not equate to true omniscience to me. and It is not the definition of omniscience I am argueing against in this thread.

I actually pointed out that problem with it as i worked through the idea with catholic Scientist.
I was just rambling as I worked through a possible concept.
I agree that it doesn't really solve the problem as we are still faced with the concept that a truly all knowing God would also heve to know which thread of reality was the true one and which would fall. Hence the original problem rears up again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2006 11:22 AM Heathen has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019