Free Will

[tcampen]

But forknowledge of a choice does not negate choice and therefore does not negate free will. Thus free will and omniscience are not mutually exclusive concepts.

Wrong. You fail to establish how one is able to do other than that which is known. If I cannot make any choice except for "X" because to do so would violate god's absoolute knowledge of that future choice, then I am necessarily powerless to make any choice but "X". I admit, it's subtle, but the logic is there. Free will still requires an element of the choice being unknown to any being at some point in time, if it is truely to be free.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Secrecy is irrelevent. Free will requires a point in which if the person making the decision does not know with absolute certainty what that choice will be.

Is someone suggesting that the person making the decision has similar knowledge of their actions as does God? It's the inclusion of the omniscient God as a supposed barrier to free will that confuses me.

 

[tcampen]

Is someone suggesting that the person making the decision has similar knowledge of their actions as does God? It's the inclusion of the omniscient God as a supposed barrier to free will that confuses me.

This point has to do with whether god can know with absolute certainty future choices that will be made by all persons, without denying their free will in making those choices. Presumably, no one knows as much about making the decision as does the decision-maker (except, perhaps, god), but that is not the issue.

Omniscience is a berrier to free will because it eliminates the ability to freely do other than that which is already known. This is not to be confused with forcing a choice as much as removing all options but one - which means there is no real choice at all.

Apologists like William Craig promote a "middle knowledge" concept, which is a fancy version of "god knows every possible choice a person could make", which would just encompass knowing quite a lot. But there is an obvious, fundamental problem with this concept...this "Middle Knowledge" is not omniscience, it's just a lot of knowledge. It's like me knowing every possible combination of the dice that could be thrown at the craps table. Sure I know every possibility, but I still don't know what the next roll will be with any absolute certainty. It doesn't make me omniscient with regard to those dice at all. Middle knowledge suffers the same flaws.

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

God doesn't have control of our consciousness therefore our thoughts or freewill is unknown to God until we act them out of our consciousness.

God created the enviroment and all the structures of existance including our consciousness but God doesn't perceive our individual forms of consciousness for only we do individually and in that consciousness there lies freewill.

 

[elman]

Wrong. You fail to establish how one is able to do other than that which is known. If I cannot make any choice except for "X" because to do so would violate god's absoolute knowledge of that future choice, then I am necessarily powerless to make any choice but "X". I admit, it's subtle, but the logic is there. Free will still requires an element of the choice being unknown to any being at some point in time, if it is truely to be free.

Wrong. It is not God's knowlege that determines what my choice is. It is my choice that determines what God knows. Free will does not require an element of the choice being unknown to any being at some point in time, if it truly to be free.

 

[elman]

Omniscience is a berrier to free will because it eliminates the ability to freely do other than that which is already known. .

Omniscience elliminates the ability to freely do other than that which is already known, but if what is already know is what is freely chosen then the choice is free and a choice and free will is intact and Omniscience is not a barriere to free will. What determines free will is do I chose or does God chose? If I chose it is my choice and that does not change just because God knew ahead of time what I was going to do. I could have done other than what I did, but if I did, that is what God would have known. So His knowledge is dependent upon what I chose, not the other way around.

 

[tcampen]

God doesn't have control of our consciousness therefore our thoughts or freewill is unknown to God until we act them out of our consciousness.

God created the enviroment and all the structures of existance including our consciousness but God doesn't perceive our individual forms of consciousness for only we do individually and in that consciousness there lies freewill.

I agree that is a reasonable view, but then God is NOT omniscient or all knowing. God just knows a lot in your scenario.

 

[tcampen]

Omniscience elliminates the ability to freely do other than that which is already known, but if what is already know is what is freely chosen then the choice is free and a choice and free will is intact and Omniscience is not a barriere to free will.

You're forgetting that the perfect and absolute knowledge of what that choice will is know before the choice is actually made. What you propose only makes our perception of free will an illusion.

What determines free will is do I chose or does God chose?

Actually, there is more to it than that. Free will requires that there actually is a choice of viable options. It's not a matter of God choosing for you, but whether any real choice is presented at all. Put it this way...

Suppose you are presented with a choice of either A or B. You think you have free will to make that decision. But God knows with absolute and perfect certainty that you will choose B. Now, tell me where you have free will to choose A instead of B.

As this example demonstrates, free will requires that the actaul decision must have a point in which the actual choice is unknown to any entity.

If I chose it is my choice and that does not change just because God knew ahead of time what I was going to do. I could have done other than what I did, but if I did, that is what God would have known. So His knowledge is dependent upon what I chose, not the other way around.

Again, that would be true if God didn't know it until you actually made the choice. But if God knew before you were even presented with the options, and knew with absolute and perfect certainty, then no real choice ever actually existed. This is not about God forcing certain decisions, but the elimination of options. Free will requires true options.

Keep asking yourself, "How do I choose differently than what is already known I will choose?" If you cannot, then you, and all of us, are locked into an unchangeable future. That just doesn't sound like free will at all.

 

[elman]

Quote:
Originally Posted by elman
Omniscience elliminates the ability to freely do other than that which is already known, but if what is already know is what is freely chosen then the choice is free and a choice and free will is intact and Omniscience is not a barriere to free will.

You're forgetting that the perfect and absolute knowledge of what that choice will is know before the choice is actually made. What you propose only makes our perception of free will an illusion.

Your foretting that the knowledge is what my choice will be, thus free will is n ot an illlusion.

Quote:
What determines free will is do I chose or does God chose?

Actually, there is more to it than that.

No actually that is all there is to it.

Free will requires that there actually is a choice of viable options.

And there is viable options. God simply knows ahead of time which option I will chose.

It's not a matter of God choosing for you, but whether any real choice is presented at all. Put it this way...

Suppose you are presented with a choice of either A or B. You think you have free will to make that decision. But God knows with absolute and perfect certainty that you will choose B. Now, tell me where you have free will to choose A instead of B.

I always had free will to choos A instead of B because God does not know with absolute and perfect certainty that I am going to chose B when I am going to chose A. He is always correct. He does not make mistakes.

As this example demonstrates, free will requires that the actaul decision must have a point in which the actual choice is unknown to any entity.

No it does not demonstate that.

Quote:
If I chose it is my choice and that does not change just because God knew ahead of time what I was going to do. I could have done other than what I did, but if I did, that is what God would have known. So His knowledge is dependent upon what I chose, not the other way around.

Again, that would be true if God didn't know it until you actually made the choice.

And it is true if God knows ahead of time because God does not know I am going to chose different than what I am going to chose. He simply knows what I am going to chose.

But if God knew before you were even presented with the options, and knew with absolute and perfect certainty,

Here is where you get off. God never knows with absolute and perfect certainty I am going to chose something I am not going to chose. He always knows correctly what I am going to chose.

then no real choice ever actually existed.

Yes I have a real choice and it is my choice that God knew ahead of time.

This is not about God forcing certain decisions, but the elimination of options. Free will requires true options.

I have true options and which option I am going to chose is what God knows.

Keep asking yourself, "How do I choose differently than what is already known I will choose?" If you cannot, then you, and all of us, are locked into an unchangeable future.

I am only locked into a future, I chose. It is my choice that determins this unchangeable future of yours. Therefore I had a choice and I have free will.

That just doesn't sound like free will at all.

As long as the choice is up to me and I make it, it is free will.

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

I agree that is a reasonable view, but then God is NOT omniscient or all knowing. God just knows a lot in your scenario.

I would say that God knows all the possible choices in our scenario that we can take as human beings but our choice that we take for ourselves in that immense form of selection is unknown to God due to the elaborate freewill extended to us from God.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

God doesn't have control of our consciousness therefore our thoughts or freewill is unknown to God until we act them out of our consciousness.

God created the enviroment and all the structures of existance including our consciousness but God doesn't perceive our individual forms of consciousness for only we do individually and in that consciousness there lies freewill.

So god does not have control over what he creates? Is this what your trying to imply? That seems mediocre for the lord of all creation.

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

So god does not have control over what he creates? Is this what your trying to imply? That seems mediocre for the lord of all creation.

God has the power to control what he creates but chooses not to in that if God did control us in force we would not be able to have the choice in worshipping God freely.

God allows us the choice to come freely of our own will.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

God has the power to control what he creates but chooses not to in that if God did control us in force we would not be able to have the choice in worshipping God freely.

God allows us the choice to come freely of our own will.

So it would openly allow us to deny him through our free will? Sounds odd to me for a god that loves praise. I dont understand that. If god is like that why does he not have more followers? Because it seems through this free-will it brings acusations about them. I dont exactly see the context of this free will with god producing it. It has no backing to it.

 

[quatona]

God has the power to control what he creates but chooses not to in that if God did control us in force we would not be able to have the choice in worshipping God freely.

And that would have been a problem for whom and how exactly?

God allows us the choice to come freely of our own will.[/quote]
I haven´t asked for it. So the more accurate wording would be "God inflicts this choice upon us" (and, I may add, without equipping us with the means to make this choice in an educated manner).

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

So it would openly allow us to deny him through our free will? Sounds odd to me for a god that loves praise. I dont understand that. If god is like that why does he not have more followers? Because it seems through this free-will it brings acusations about them. I dont exactly see the context of this free will with god producing it. It has no backing to it.

What is the problem in understanding that God wants us to come in praise freely and not that of force?


Those who choose not to worship God have that choice.

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

And that would have been a problem for whom and how exactly?

God allows us the choice to come freely of our own will.

I haven´t asked for it. So the more accurate wording would be "God inflicts this choice upon us" (and, I may add, without equipping us with the means to make this choice in an educated manner).[/quote]

The reason of free will is to choose our own purpose in the eyes of God or not.........

What exactly to you would be a better alternative then free will?

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

What is the problem in understanding that God wants us to come in praise freely and not that of force?


Those who choose not to worship God have that choice.

How can free will be created when that free will has been created by something other then ourself?

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

How can free will be created when that free will has been created by something other then ourself?

We are not seperate from existance but we are intricate beings of existance fully connected to creation.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

Its existence. What does your statement mean? It makes no probably sense. By saying what your saying you can mean atheistic viewpoint or christian or religious viewpoint. You must elaborate. We may be intricate beings in existence but whats the sense that our free-will is free at all when something else "allows" us to have it. Its more so an idea that free-will is not free-will as you describe it since another thing created it for us to use.

By what your saying i have not created my own free-will. There is a difference between the statement "condemned to be free" and free-will. Your contradicting the latter and ignoring the first. What your calling free-will is no longer free but a will of another upon us.

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

Its existence. What does your statement mean? It makes no probably sense. By saying what your saying you can mean atheistic viewpoint or christian or religious viewpoint. You must elaborate. We may be intricate beings in existence but whats the sense that our free-will is free at all when something else "allows" us to have it. Its more so an idea that free-will is not free-will as you describe it since another thing created it for us to use.

By what your saying i have not created my own free-will. There is a difference between the statement "condemned to be free" and free-will. Your contradicting the latter and ignoring the first. What your calling free-will is no longer free but a will of another upon us.

The origins of freewill is irrelevant for the fact and importance is that it is present currently................still allowing us the freedom of choice.

It is of no importance if this freewill was bestowed upon us because we have freewill presently.