|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 30, 2011 15:11:07 GMT -5
Okay, I'm annoyed enough to just skip to the end of page three... Nickerson: Is it possible to make a choice contrary to what God knows you will do? This is nothing like gravity, either. Natural laws mean that gravity just is. However, free will means that you can choose to type the letter k on a keyboard. Unless something is physically preventing you from doing so you are going to press the letter k if you choose to press it. That's what choice is. But if God knows you will press the k it is impossible to not press k. You do not have any more choice in the matter than you have on whether or not gravity will affect you. Yes, you will just not. That is different than can not. God's foreknowledge would be based on and because of your decision, not the other way around. There is nothing preventing you from pressing k nor is there anything making you press k.
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Sept 30, 2011 15:19:23 GMT -5
Of for the love of...
It is not possible to make a choice that God knows you will not make, as per the definition of omniscience. You cannot choose to act in a manner contrary to what God knows you will do. There is no choice, there is no free will to it. Self-awareness? Possible with an omniscient being. But you WILL act as God knows you will. Free will is the ability to choose to attempt an action. Granted you may be unable to take the action due to external factors, but you still made a choice.
Unless you're using your own definition of the word choice, in which case discussion with you is useless. If your argument hinges on redefining words than your position is not truly defensible.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 30, 2011 16:11:08 GMT -5
Of for the love of... It is not possible to make a choice that God knows you will not make, as per the definition of omniscience. You cannot choose to act in a manner contrary to what God knows you will do. There is no choice, there is no free will to it. Self-awareness? Possible with an omniscient being. But you WILL act as God knows you will. Free will is the ability to choose to attempt an action. Granted you may be unable to take the action due to external factors, but you still made a choice. Unless you're using your own definition of the word choice, in which case discussion with you is useless. If your argument hinges on redefining words than your position is not truly defensible. Can do and will do are different. Let try to explain this in another way... We are comparing events within a changing universe that are within the flow of time that have not happened yet, with a being that is not within time and is unchanging. God being all knowing, all powerful and never ending, is unchanging. God is the same at the beginning of time as he is at the end of time. He also exist at every point in time. For him every event has happened. Every possible event's probability is now 1 or 0. We exist within time. For us future events are not set. Only the past is. If I take a D6 and roll it and it comes up 3, the probability of rolling a 3 is now 1. It happened, I cannot change that. If I pick up the same die my the probability of rolling a 3 is 1 in 6. That is until I roll it. Once I do that probability is now 1 or 0. That does not mean that the probability was always 1 or 0, a few moments before it was 1 in 6. That did not change before I rolled the die. Which means the outcome was not set. Which means there was still 6 possibilities. Only to chance a moments later. This is the same with free will. Until you make a choice all possibilities to you are open. Once you make your choice, they no longer are. That is simply because we are anchored to time, specifically whatever moment we are in. God is not. While we call it foreknowledge, to God it is simply looking into what has already happened.
|
|
|
Post by Tenfold_Maquette on Sept 30, 2011 16:42:37 GMT -5
That does not mean that the probability was always 1 or 0, a few moments before it was 1 in 6. That did not change before I rolled the die. Which means the outcome was not set. The problem is that God (being omnipotent) created you, the dice, and all the details thereof in such as way as to know with 100% certainty what the outcome of the roll will be. You don't know what will happen before the die comes to rest, but God does. You have the illusion that there was something random to the way the die landed, but God (being omniscient) already knew because the outcome of the roll had already been decided. Thus you think you have free will, but from the point of view of your omniscient, omnipotent God...you most certainly do not.
|
|
|
Post by John E on Sept 30, 2011 18:15:06 GMT -5
Let's say I chose to eat at McDonnalds today. Could god have created the universe in such a way that I would have instead chosen to eat at Burger King? If he's omnipotent, then the answer is yes. Did he know which choice I was going to make when he made the universe the way he did? If he's omniscient, then the answer is also yes.
As such, he essentially made that choice for me. From the instant he set things in motion, there was no possibility of me doing anything else.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 30, 2011 18:22:48 GMT -5
The problem is that God (being omnipotent) created you, the dice, and all the details thereof in such as way as to know with 100% certainty what the outcome of the roll will be. You don't know what will happen before the die comes to rest, but God does. You have the illusion that there was something random to the way the die landed, but God (being omniscient) already knew because the outcome of the roll had already been decided. Thus you think you have free will, but from the point of view of your omniscient, omnipotent God...you most certainly do not. The thing is God knows the outcome of the roll, because to him it has never not been rolled. That is to say, to God there is no before and after. Just as, to you, after the roll the results are known and unchangeable. So, from God's perspective we might not have free will, but from ours we do. Since we can't change out perspective we must have free will.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 30, 2011 18:25:36 GMT -5
Let's say I chose to eat at McDonnalds today. Could god have created the universe in such a way that I would have instead chosen to eat at Burger King? If he's omnipotent, then the answer is yes. Did he know which choice I was going to make when he made the universe the way he did? If he's omniscient, then the answer is also yes. As such, he essentially made that choice for me. From the instant he set things in motion, there was no possibility of me doing anything else. I don't agree that he could. If he could he could change, if he can change he can be fallible. If he is fallible he is not God.
|
|
|
Post by Shano on Sept 30, 2011 19:34:57 GMT -5
So, from God's perspective we might not have free will, but from ours we do. Since we can't change out perspective we must have free will. So the inability of changing our own local perspective sets the global value of the existance of free will? Including for a god? How can a property of a creation set the properties of the creator? Did free will exist before the creation of the humans in the abrahamic mythology?
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 30, 2011 19:44:38 GMT -5
So the inability of changing our own local perspective sets the global value of the existance of free will? Including for a god? How can a property of a creation set the properties of the creator? Did free will exist before the creation of the humans in the abrahamic mythology? No, only the valve of it's existence within out own perspective. To answer your question, no. (unless we considered angles) Before humans there was only one perspective, that of God's. Since from his perspective all events have already taken place, there is no free will.
|
|
|
Post by Shano on Sept 30, 2011 20:18:33 GMT -5
But the question about the existence of free will for some is not local. Those people could for example say that the free will that humans perceive is just an illusion since it doesn't coincide with the perception of an omniscient and omnipotent being. They could argue that the perception of the omniscient and omnipotent being is the global and thus the only valid perception.
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Sept 30, 2011 20:25:09 GMT -5
Since this is getting into an argument over semantics, I will just give this analogy:
Can a character in a work of fiction act in any way contrary to how the author of their story wants them to act?
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 30, 2011 20:33:42 GMT -5
But the question about the existence of free will for some is not local. Those people could for example say that the free will that humans perceive is just an illusion since it doesn't coincide with the perception of an omniscient and omnipotent being. They could argue that the perception of the omniscient and omnipotent being is the global and thus the only valid perception. The thing is that perception of God could not be global (or perhaps better stated universal) since it can only exist with God. Just as the Human perspective cannot be universal since it can't exist with God. So there can be no universal perspective. Therefore the only perspective humans can have is there own, so for us it is the only on that exists.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Sept 30, 2011 20:38:24 GMT -5
And yet we can approach problems from a universal perspective. And that's ignoring that our perspective may be invalid, even if we are unable to see past it. And, ultimately, we still have a situation where our actions are predefined by external factors. We may be physically capable of pressing "p" instead of "k," but we don't and if it is possible for a being to know what we will do before we do it, we do not have the ability to do anything but what has been predicted. The whole perspective thing you're talking about is not true free will, but the illusion of free will.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 30, 2011 20:39:54 GMT -5
Can a character in a work of fiction act in any way contrary to how the author of their story wants them to act? From their perspective (if they could have perspective) yes.
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Sept 30, 2011 20:46:59 GMT -5
Can a character in a work of fiction act in any way contrary to how the author of their story wants them to act? From their perspective (if they could have perspective) yes. Not if the story has no fourth wall.
|
|