Did God know if you were going to read this thread?

[bling]

That presupposes that God is in time, which He isn't.

I hope you do not think I believe God is limited by time. He exists throughout time simultaneously. When I talk about before and after it is in reference to man.

 

[doubtingmerle]

In particular, when I have eggs for breakfast tomorrow (if indeed that is what I will do) it will be because that's what I want to do (or because I've got eggs in the refrigerator and I'm too lazy to go out and buy breakfast cereal). There is no incompatibility with God's foreknowledge there.

Thanks for the links. I will read them.

BTW, I wasn't intending this thread to be a "rigorous philosophical argument."

You say your day's activity are all already known, but you have no problem with that. You are doing what you want to do. But what about all the things you will want to do today? Are those wants already known? If everything you will ever do, ever say, ever want, ever feel, ever think is all set for life before you were born, and cannot be otherwise, how is that different from an automaton? It is as though we are all pieces of automation that have our entire life prewritten before we are ever born. But you might say that pre-write is consistent with who we were before birth. Fine. But in that case, our life is no more than a reenactment of a play that had already been written. How can I be responsible for what I was before birth? How can that be "free will"?

 

[doubtingmerle]

What if God knows that he will eat eggs tomorrow? It seems that God would sacrifice his own ability to choose and change his mind in favor of his ability to know the future.

You seem to be describing a God that is pretty smart, not one that is omnipotent.

 

[Radagast]

I hope you do not think I believe God is limited by time. He exists throughout time simultaneously. When I talk about before and after it is in reference to man.

Fair enough.

It is, after all, difficult to get verb tenses right when talking about the foreknowledge of God.

 

[Radagast]

BTW, I wasn't intending this thread to be a "rigorous philosophical argument."

If not, what's the point?

If everything you will ever do, ever say, ever want, ever feel, ever think is all set for life before you were born, and cannot be otherwise, how is that different from an automaton?

Because I do the things that I want to do. An automaton has no wants or wishes.

How can that be "free will"?

I believe in compatibilist free will. I don't believe in libertarian free will. In fact, I'm not even sure that libertarian free will is a coherent concept.

But I'm getting the feeling that your core issue is that you're just confused about free will.

From your own philosophical standpoint, what makes you think that we have free will of any kind?

 

[doubtingmerle]

Because I do the things that I want to do. An automaton has no wants or wishes.

Understood, but as I asked in the last post, were all your wants known before birth? if everything we would ever want and do are known before birth, then we are just automatons that have automated wants. We would be automatons that feel like doing what has already been cast in stone that we will do.

From your own philosophical standpoint, what makes you think that we have free will of any kind?

I discuss my views in a post in the middle of this thread. I believe that I am the physical collection of matter and energy that makes up my body. That collection of matter and energy decides what I will do. I do not know if the matter and energy that I call "me" does what has been predetermined for "me" to do, or does what quantum mechanical events lead me to do. But at any rate, I don't think I have an independent soul that is sitting in the cockpit.

 

[Radagast]

Understood, but as I asked in the last post, were all your wants known before birth?

Of course.

Nevertheless, they are my wants. I can almost taste those eggs already! I want them so much!

if everything we would ever want and do are known before birth, then we are just automatons that have automated wants.

Automata have no wants. Try building one.

I discuss my views in a post in the middle of this thread. I believe that I am the physical collection of matter and energy that makes up my body. That collection of matter and energy decides what I will do.

If you're only a physical collection of matter and energy, then your actions are determined by the laws of physics (with a possible quantum element that consists of purely random dice rolls). There is no libertarian free will down that road.

But at any rate, I don't think I have an independent soul that is sitting in the cockpit. We are all on autopilot, friend.

And that sounds like a denial of libertarian free will to me.

Which makes me wonder: what was this thread actually about?

 

[cloudyday2]

You seem to be describing a God that is pretty smart, not one that is omnipotent.

If God is too smart/omniscient then he cannot experience life as we do. Imagine if you know with 100% certainty what you are going to do for the remainder of your life and everything that you will experience. You would probably be pretty bored.

I don't know when this omniscient/omnipotent/etc became the assumption in theology. We need to start with whatever data we have about God and hypothesize his attributes from that. The theologians and philosophers who decided that God MUST be omniscient/omnipotent/etc were being foolish and unimaginative.

Imagine that the universe is a computer simulation and God is the computer programmer. God inside his own universe might be very similar to the humans he programmed inside his simulated universe. Maybe the random number generators in the simulation are truly random as opposed to pseudo-random (from God's perspective). There are lots of possibilities to consider.

Even if a person is a Bible-believer, there are various depictions of God in the Bible, and not all of those depictions are consistent with omniscient/omnipotent/etc.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Nevertheless, they are my wants. I can almost taste those eggs already! I want them so much!

Yes, but where do those wants come from? Was it all cast in stone that you would want eggs right now?

Automata have no wants. Try building one.

I know. I am an engineer who does automation.

Are our wants any more than the electro-mechanical impulses in our bodies?

If you're only a physical collection of matter and energy, then your actions are determined by the laws of physics (with a possible quantum element that consists of purely random dice rolls). There is no libertarian free will down that road.

Correct. The matter and forces that make up my body run the show. They produce what we call a consciousness which has the illusion of being in control. But there is no separate consciousness controlling the body. The body runs the show.

And that sounds like a denial of libertarian free will to me.

It depends how we define "me".

If "me" means the collection of matter and forces that make up my body, then "me" is in charge of my decisions. If "me" refers to a soul separate from the body, then that "me" does not even exist, as far as I know.

Which makes me wonder: what was this thread actually about?

It is about the incompatibility of an all-knowing God and independent agents who run their own lives.

 

[Radagast]

Yes, but where do those wants come from?

That doesn't matter. The key thing is that I want what I want.

I know. I am an engineer who does automation.

Then you presumably see what I mean.

Are our wants any more than the electro-mechanical impulses in our bodies?

I would say: yes.

It is about the incompatibility of an all-knowing God and independent agents who run their own lives.

But starting with a straw-man caricature of Christianity wasn't really helpful.

These are old questions; they have long-standing good answers. The answer, as far as I'm concerned, is compatibilist free will.

Other Christian responses, like the Boethian one, also exist.

I think we're done now. </thread>

 

[doubtingmerle]

That doesn't matter. The key thing is that I want what I want.

Hmm. This was in response to my questions:

Yes, but where do those wants come from? Was it all cast in stone that you would want eggs right now?

So the whole story of your life could have been cast in stone before you were born. You could have absolutely no power to make it be otherwise. Now it just so happens that you have emotions and desires that are compatible with what is written in your life script. You see that your emotions and desires don't change the script. If the script says you will eat eggs, then by golly, you will get the desire to eat eggs, and you will eat them, exactly as the script says you will do.

But none of that matters to you, as long as you like the eggs the script tells you to eat?

But starting with a straw-man caricature of Christianity wasn't really helpful.

I really don't see how this was a straw man. It was a set of 3 simple questions. Again, this is the OP:

OK, you are here. Did God know if you were going to read this thread?

If yes, then how can you have free will? For you had to click that button, and there is no way you could have done anything but read this.

But if God did not know, how can he be all knowing?​

How is that a straw man?

I think we're done now. </thread>

Provided, of course, that the script doesn't say you come back. After all, if it is written from all eternity that you will continue to post here, then by golly, you will wake up tomorrow with the desire for eggs, bacon, and this thread.

 

[doubtingmerle]

I don't know when this omniscient/omnipotent/etc became the assumption in theology. We need to start with whatever data we have about God and hypothesize his attributes from that. The theologians and philosophers who decided that God MUST be omniscient/omnipotent/etc were being foolish and unimaginative.

Much of the old testament was written in a polytheistic era. The response seems to be that we have a God too, and our God can beat up your god. It's a!most like locker room bragging. With time that grew into one all powerful god..

 

[doubtingmerle]

These are old questions; they have long-standing good answers. The answer, as far as I'm concerned, is compatibilist free will.

Other Christian responses, like the Boethian one, also exist.

That's odd. Again and again people have told me that I was asking nonsense questions that could not possibly be addressed. Now it turns out that these are questions that Christians have themselves been asking for years, and have long ago come up with resolutions. Maybe you should share that insight with with people that have been posting here. They seem to have missed that.

 

[JIMINZ]

(1) I'm not convinced that God must be omniscient
(2) If we imagine that the future does not exist until it happens then God doesn't need to know the future. We can define "omniscient" to mean "knowing everything about the universe that is knowable so far".

The remaking of God in your own image.

 

[cloudyday2]

The remaking of God in your own image.

maybe

 

[Radagast]

Now it turns out that these are questions that Christians have themselves been asking for years, and have long ago come up with resolutions.

This is certainly true. I've got no idea why people would tell you that these questions "could not possibly be addressed."

But none of that matters to you, as long as you like the eggs the script tells you to eat?

Exactly right.

And it doesn't even require the omniscience of God; my best friend can also predict in advance which way I'm going to decide on almost any question.

Provided, of course, that the script doesn't say you come back. After all, if it is written from all eternity that you will continue to post here, then by golly, you will wake up tomorrow with the desire for eggs, bacon, and this thread.

Exactly right again.

 

[Ed1wolf]

OK, you are here. Did God know if you were going to read this thread?

If yes, then how can you have free will? For you had to click that button, and there is no way you could have done anything but read this.

But if God did not know, how can he be all knowing?

Knowledge is passive not active, it does nothing to your will.

 

[doubtingmerle]

If knowledge knows I will eat eggs for breakfast tomorrow, does my will have the ability to go against knowledge, and eat pancakes instead?

 

[Qwertyui0p]

And you could not possibly have chosen to bypass this thread?

Yes.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Yes.

Ah, so God knew you were going to click this thread, but you still could choose not to? In that case, God is mistaken.