Free Will

[aigiqinf]

Again, you've not addressed the argument. If God knows at time X-1 that you're going to flip a coin at time X, you have no choice but to flip the coin - do you call it a free choice if you can't choose not to?

But God just knew it was going to happen.
With the coin, you flip it. How you flip it and the effects of gravity cause it to land on a certain side. The only way it does not land that way is if an outside forced interrupts (i.e. a bird comes and grabs it in mid air) because you can only be 100% sure something is going to happen if you know nothing it going to interfere, God can look logically and determine what will happen. Only God can interfere with what will happen so he knows what will happen, and not causes it.

 

[quatona]

If God is omnipotent, he could see the future as well as not see the future,.

 

[phsyxx]

To the series of posts by aigiqinf :


The question here is (for me) whether you genuinely disagree with the premise of determism on the grounds that it is a logically flawed concept,
OR that you are disagreeing because you find the idea of being free desirable.


Now, I feel it is the latter.
So, in an attempt to reassure you, let me tell you this:

Whether or not determinism is TRUE (as a concept/system of thought), it DOES NOT affect you.
Why?
Well, let me say that by saying "you are determined to do something" doesn't stop you from having a great time, and it certainly doesn't mean that ANYONE knows what you are going to do in life - let alone you;
it just means if there is GOD, your actions are already written.

It does not, under ANY circumstances, actually change anything.
Suddenly, by saying that the moon is made of cheese, the moon turns yellow and ceases to be made of rock.
NO.

And what happens, by saying "you are determined" (to do X action/response/career) does not change anything about you, or the world.


I hope that lets you emotionally detach yourself from the idea of freedom.
And I also am working on the basis that you find the idea of freedom desirable.

PHSYXX

 

[FishFace]

If God is omnipotent, he could see the future as well as not see the future, and if something happens whether or not what you claim cause it is present, then it must not cause it.

Then your argument is that God is not omniscient - which certainly resolved the inconsistency, but you need to evaluate the implications that has with the consistency of your other beliefs.
First and most obviously, you are rejecting the God most Christians, and indeed most theists of any faith, believe in. There's not a problem with that, but you need to be aware of it.
But you also need to realise that if God doesn't know all of the future, he must either be changing (i.e. non-transcendental - i.e. he must exist within space-time) or he must never know the choices we make. Let me explain - if before an action, God doesn't know what you're going to do, but afterwards, he knows what you did, he must have changed. Change, by definition, requires time to happen in - God cannot logically change from one state (unknowing) to another (knowing) unless he exists within time. Is this consistent with your understanding of God? If God exists within time, he exists within space-time - i.e. he is part of this universe. It would then make sense that he would be detectable as part of it. If, on the other hand, you want God to remain transcendental, but still not know what you're going to choose, then God cannot actually ever know what you choose - and thus he cannot decide whether you go to heaven or hell, or anything in between.

 

[FishFace]

But God just knew it was going to happen.
With the coin, you flip it. How you flip it and the effects of gravity cause it to land on a certain side. The only way it does not land that way is if an outside forced interrupts (i.e. a bird comes and grabs it in mid air) because you can only be 100% sure something is going to happen if you know nothing it going to interfere, God can look logically and determine what will happen. Only God can interfere with what will happen so he knows what will happen, and not causes it.

It's not what side the coin lands that matters, it's actions you take - like flipping the coin. Again, if God knows you're going to flip the coin, you cannot choose not to flip the coin. If God doesn't know, then perhaps you can, but there is an array of other questions that you need to think about.

 

[nommo]

Isn't a free will contradicting election?

 

[aigiqinf]

Then your argument is that God is not omniscient - which certainly resolved the inconsistency, but you need to evaluate the implications that has with the consistency of your other beliefs.
First and most obviously, you are rejecting the God most Christians, and indeed most theists of any faith, believe in. There's not a problem with that, but you need to be aware of it.
But you also need to realise that if God doesn't know all of the future, he must either be changing (i.e. non-transcendental - i.e. he must exist within space-time) or he must never know the choices we make. Let me explain - if before an action, God doesn't know what you're going to do, but afterwards, he knows what you did, he must have changed. Change, by definition, requires time to happen in - God cannot logically change from one state (unknowing) to another (knowing) unless he exists within time. Is this consistent with your understanding of God? If God exists within time, he exists within space-time - i.e. he is part of this universe. It would then make sense that he would be detectable as part of it. If, on the other hand, you want God to remain transcendental, but still not know what you're going to choose, then God cannot actually ever know what you choose - and thus he cannot decide whether you go to heaven or hell, or anything in between.

If one is all powerful, by definition one must have the power not to do something.

 

[elman]

Quote:
Originally Posted by elman
Asserting I am free to make my own decisions on some things is not arguing that I am unaffected in my decision making by my surroundings.

Can I pick through that, if I may?
Effectively you are admitting that your decision making IS affected by your surroundings.

I don't have to admit it. I never claimed otherwise.

But how do you know that only SOME of your decisions are affected by your surroundings?

The same way you know that all of my decisions are affected by my surroundings. We don't.

I mean, ALL of your decisions are entirely dependent on your environment.
WHY?
Well, tommorow I will go and flux a gargle-decomposer.

See, thing is, I can only make decisions based upon what my environment presents me.
But - my environment shapes my decisions.
Do you see? Cause and effect.
It rains - you, as a creature do not like rain - you instinctively want to find shelter ASAP.
Now, you didn't have any choice whether or not you like rain, and you don't have any choice that it's going to make you wet, and - if you stay out too long - ill.
You also didn't have any choice whether it rained or not.

But I have a lot of different choices I can make as the result of it raining. Thus all my choice are not dependent on my environment.

Plus - the only reason you would go out is because something in your environment demands it.

Or because I want to. You are simply incorrect to assume my environment totally controls me. I wonder why you are unable to see it also does not totally controll you.

Put simply - if the was no stimuli, there would be no response demanded of you.

Stimuli can cause a predictible reaction in unthinking things that simply feel. When we think as well as feel we can chose between a varity of reactions. Yes each reaction is caused by the stimulie but the particular reation is chosen by us and not forced on us by the stimuli.



Quote:
Originally Posted by elman
The issue is not was the outcome known from the start. The issue is who determines the outcome that is known from the start?

If known from the start - (by God) then either the being that knows - or the factors themselves, and the being has no control over the situation, because the being knows the outcome is DEFINITE.

Not understandable.

[I'd prefer it if you used the term 'what' rather than 'who', so that the outcome may be seen in terms of factors, rather than emotionally intelligent beings making decisions, which causes a biased view on the matter.]

We are talking about emotionally intelligent beings making decisions. That is the subject under discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elman
If I make the determination, then the issue was not determined before I existed, but it may have been known before I existed.

But you don't, do you?

Yes I do and so do you. What forced you to post that question? Was it you or your great grandfather's dna?

You may believe you do, but that's as far as it goes.
The universe can be seen in this simplified form :
Cause - effect - (factors involved affect other objects/matter) - behavioural change in matter - (the effect) - in turn is CAUSE, as it affects more matter -

I can only go on what I observe to be true on this. I see options. I make decisions. I live with the consequences. You do the same. What would make you think you are fooling yourself when it appears you are makeing decisions? Yes cause and effect is simple. I make the decision and it causes the effect I wanted it to, sometimes and sometimes I am surprised by the effect but the cause was still my decision and I could have chosen one of the options I did not chose.

 

[aigiqinf]

It's not what side the coin lands that matters, it's actions you take - like flipping the coin. Again, if God knows you're going to flip the coin, you cannot choose not to flip the coin. If God doesn't know, then perhaps you can, but there is an array of other questions that you need to think about.

So just because I know you are going to choose to do something, you no longer chose to do it?

 

[FishFace]

If one is all powerful, by definition one must have the power not to do something.

No, because God is not "all powerful" as you appear to be saying it. God does not have the power to create a rock he cannot lift, since it's logically impossible and therefore meaningless - that's not a problem for theists, it's just how it is. So if God is omniscient, that puts logical constraints on what he can do. He wouldn't be able to not know something, he wouldn't be able to surprise himself or change his mind, and so on.
That's not a problem, it's just true.

But if you don't believe in God's omniscience you've got problems, as outlined above, which you've not addressed. Are you going to?

Further, there's a pretty strong Biblical case for omniscience.

 

[FishFace]

So just because I know you are going to choose to do something, you no longer chose to do it?

Again you're not thinking it through. It's not you who knows, it's god. If God knows I'm going to choose something, I cannot not choose it, so how is it a choice?

You don't seem to understand the argument.

 

[aigiqinf]

No, because God is not "all powerful" as you appear to be saying it. God does not have the power to create a rock he cannot lift, since it's logically impossible and therefore meaningless - that's not a problem for theists, it's just how it is. So if God is omniscient, that puts logical constraints on what he can do. He wouldn't be able to not know something, he wouldn't be able to surprise himself or change his mind, and so on.
That's not a problem, it's just true.

But if you don't believe in God's omniscience you've got problems, as outlined above, which you've not addressed. Are you going to?

Further, there's a pretty strong Biblical case for omniscience.

He could not create a rock that you could not lift, but you could create a rock he chooses not to lift. God cannot create a future he can't see, but he can create one he chooses not to see.

 

[aigiqinf]

Again you're not thinking it through. It's not you who knows, it's god. If God knows I'm going to choose something, I cannot not choose it, so how is it a choice?

You don't seem to understand the argument.

So just because God knows you are going to choose to do something, you no longer chose to do it?

I do indeed understand the argument, but one can understand without agreeing.

 

[FishFace]

He could not create a rock that you could not lift, but you could create a rock he chooses not to lift. God cannot create a future he can't see, but he can create one he chooses not to see.

If he chooses not to see it, he's not omniscient. If he's not omniscient, you're subject to the problems outlined above with atemporality and intransigence.

So just because God knows you are going to choose to do something, you no longer chose to do it?

Correct. Here are two simple questions:

If God knows you are going to do something, is there any chance you will not do that thing?
If there is no chance of you not doing something, how do you have a choice in whether or not you do it?

 

[phsyxx]

So just because God knows you are going to choose to do something, you no longer chose to do it?

I do indeed understand the argument, but one can understand without agreeing.

"God knows you are going to choose to do something"....
ok...let's reword that:

"God knows you are going to do something"....

that's much better.
If God knows an event involving you performing an act (say flipping a coin) is going to happen, it may APPEAR to YOU that you have CHOSEN to do it, but in actuality - GOD knew - therefore, from the Godly view:
You were determined to flip the coin.

 

[quatona]

"God knows you are going to choose to do something"....
ok...let's reword that:

"God knows you are going to do something"....

that's much better.
If God knows an event involving you performing an act (say flipping a coin) is going to happen, it may APPEAR to YOU that you have CHOSEN to do it, but in actuality - GOD knew - therefore, from the Godly view:
You were determined to flip the coin.

This is an important point. The arbitrary change of perspective is a major clouding issue in approaching these questions. Whilst usually insisting on looking at things from god´s alleged perspective (or a supposedly objective perspective if being a nontheistic objectivist, or an assumed non-athropocentric perspective, which is actually the whole point of metaphysical philosophy), out of a sudden "that´s how I perceive it" is re-introduced as the standard for philosophical considerations.

If god is eternal and omniscient there can´t be any such things as change, choice, development, time, event from his perspective.
That´s where the move of defining god as a "beyond" being kicks you in the butt. Along with exempting him from those things he is defined as being "beyond" it also limits him as not being able to experience our world in terms of that which he is defined to be "beyond".
Not even god can have the cookie and eat it, too.

 

[quatona]

So just because God knows you are going to choose to do something, you no longer chose to do it?

Which does not necessarily mean that god determines your actions, it just is based on the observation that the fact that something is perfectly known in advance by an infallible being indicates it as being determined.

 

[quatona]

I do indeed understand the argument, but one can understand without agreeing.

Of course you are welcome to disagree. It´s just that if you give no arguments for your disagreement I have no reason whatsoever to reconsider.

 

[elman]

This is an important point. The arbitrary change of perspective is a major clouding issue in approaching these questions. Whilst usually insisting on looking at things from god´s alleged perspective (or a supposedly objective perspective if being a nontheistic objectivist, or an assumed non-athropocentric perspective, which is actually the whole point of metaphysical philosophy), out of a sudden "that´s how I perceive it" is re-introduced as the standard for philosophical considerations.

If god is eternal and omniscient there can´t be any such things as change, choice, development, time, event from his perspective.
That´s where the move of defining god as a "beyond" being kicks you in the butt. Along with exempting him from those things he is defined as being "beyond" it also limits him as not being able to experience our world in terms of that which he is defined to be "beyond".
Not even god can have the cookie and eat it, too.

Why do you think God would be unable to give me a choice and at the same time know what I am going to chose? What would make Him unable to do that? Being eternal and omniscient does not mean there cannot be any such things as change, choice, development, time, event from his perspective. He could very well see our changing and chosing and developing in time even as He knew what we were going to do before we did it.

 

[elman]

Which does not necessarily mean that god determines your actions, it just is based on the observation that the fact that something is perfectly known in advance by an infallible being indicates it as being determined.

No it does not indicate it is being determined, if that infallible being gave me the power to determine for myself; and His knowing what I am going to do, does not make it His choice reather than mine. The important point continues to be He knew what I was going to chose to do, not just what I was going to do.