Free Will

[phsyxx]

I was not raised speaking French

No. Exactly.
But if you were free, you could have spoken French if you wanted to.

If you were free, you could have decided who your parents were;
you could have decided when to be born,
you could have decided what you look like,
what species you are
where you exist
what you believe.


If I know you are going to throw a 6 when playing dice, it doesn't cause you to throw the six - you are the cause - and you may feel like the way you threw it (speed, height, timing) was the determining factor -
but
the outcome was determined from the start.
Imagine watching a football match on TV. It's not live, it's recorded. You know the outcome.
Now, the players on the video don't know the outcome, and they don't know what they will do over the course of the game - but you do.
Compare that to God. You are the football player, and God is the one with the videotape of the game.
You feel free, it seems all your decisions are your own, and the outcome is as you make it.
BUT - to God, the outcome will always be the same - is the same - WAS the same.

 

[elman]

No. Exactly.
But if you were free, you could have spoken French if you wanted to.

If you were free, you could have decided who your parents were;
you could have decided when to be born,
you could have decided what you look like,
what species you are
where you exist
what you believe.


If I know you are going to throw a 6 when playing dice, it doesn't cause you to throw the six - you are the cause - and you may feel like the way you threw it (speed, height, timing) was the determining factor -
but
the outcome was determined from the start.
Imagine watching a football match on TV. It's not live, it's recorded. You know the outcome.
Now, the players on the video don't know the outcome, and they don't know what they will do over the course of the game - but you do.
Compare that to God. You are the football player, and God is the one with the videotape of the game.
You feel free, it seems all your decisions are your own, and the outcome is as you make it.
BUT - to God, the outcome will always be the same - is the same - WAS the same.

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. No one arguring for free will is arguing we are without limitations on what we can decide to do. Also 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 I make the determination, then the issue was not determined before I existed, but it may have been known before I existed.

 

[elman]

Opinions, opinions.

As is the statment there is no God.

 

[Emmy]

Dear cairaiii. God gave us free will to choose our own destiny, with a loving Creator-Father, or without. God knows our past, He knows the present, and He also knows the future, in fact He knows ALL. God also sees everything and hears everything, He is Omnipotent. Because He can see us from beginning to end, He knows what we have chosen, Not because He foreordained it, but because we have chosen it. Those of us who are predestined for special tasks, are chosen because God could see, that we were right for the God-chosen task. Because God saw our willingness, our basic character, and our abilities. We were given free will by God, and God is no liar. I say this humbly and lovingly, cairaiii, and send greetings. Emmy, sister in Christ.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

As is the statment there is no God.

Yes, but my opinion opposes a man made contingency.

 

[elman]

Yes, but my opinion opposes a man made contingency.

No it opposes what you think is a man made contingency. Just more opinion.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

And you support what your opinion is of the contingency, just more opinion.

 

[elman]

And you support what your opinion is of the contingency, just more opinion.

Right it is all opinion--yours and mine.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

Then you cant de-sanctify my opinion with that of yours.

 

[elman]

Then you cant de-sanctify my opinion with that of yours.

Well my opinion is right and yours is wrong, is that de-sanctifying it?

 

[aigiqinf]

Are you suggesting then that by knowing that we cause?
Luke 22:34 (New International Version)

New International Version (NIV)

34Jesus answered, "I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me."



Did Jesus, by knowing the denial, cause the denial?


If there is no free will, then everything is caused by God and that makes God the author of sin. Unless you are suggesting there is a forced that God does not have power over?

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

Well your opinion cannot be right in the consideration that according to my opinion, and upon atheistic perspective the entire context of your argument is based upon a purely subjective point of view on the subject. Since the formalities of your argument are not in fact capable of being brought to bare, you cannot exactly say you are correct because in the sense you are leading yourself into a false premise of sub-text in the example you wish to imply to me. If your statement is true, and mine is wrong then that brings about the fact that i associate myself with the statement that i am right, and you are wrong. This means in the ending then that the truth you wish to possess is an inconsistent truth with-itself on the subject. This also means the formalities you wish to compose the backing to your inconsistent truth are thus also dualistically negating in nature, and cannot support each other in their persona's in which you use them. So next time, before you make an assumption, look at the formalities that you base your context upon.

 

[phsyxx]

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

Plus - the only reason you would go out is because something in your environment demands it.
Put simply - if the was no stimuli, there would be no response demanded of you.

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.

[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.]

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?
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 -

REPEAT PROCESS.

 

[FishFace]

Are you suggesting then that by knowing that we cause?

Goodness me, why does this always come up? Of course not - but the fact that someone can know with certainty before the fact that something will happen means that that thing will happen. So Jesus may or may not have caused Peter to deny him, but nonetheless, Peter had no choice if Jesus was correct. And we can assume Jesus was correct, since Jesus, as God, is omniscient.

Think of it this way. In a normal weather report, the weatherman says, "It's going to be rainy tomorrow." Now, he certainly doesn't cause it to be rainy, does he? In fact, he could be wrong - it might be sunny. But, if we add the premise that the weatherman is always right - i.e. he is omniscient, then it directly follows from that premise that it will be rainy tomorrow. In argument form:

P1 - The Weatherman is always right
P2 - The Weatherman says it will rain tomorrow
C1 - It will rain tomorrow.

This is a valid logical argument - if the premises are true, the conclusion follows necessarily. But now let's swap the weatherman for God:

P1 - God is always right
P2 - God says (or knows) you will have a cup of coffee tomorrow morning
C1 - You will have a cup of coffee tomorrow morning.

Exactly the same - if the premises are true (i.e. if God is omniscient, and if he knows you will have a cup of coffee tomorrow morning) then the conclusion follows.
Now, at this very moment in time, God knows exactly what you will drink tomorrow morning - so say most theists. It is a this does not cause you to drink that thing, but it does mean that you will drink it.

 

[FishFace]

If I make the determination, then the issue was not determined before I existed, but it may have been known before I existed.

If the issue was not determined, it cannot be known, because it was still uncertain.

Let as assume that, at point in time X, you eat a biscuit. Now, at time X-1, there are two possibilities. Either, there is a chance that you will eat a biscuit at X, or it is certain that you will eat a biscuit at X.
But God is omniscient so, at time X-1, he must know that you eat a biscuit at X. He doesn't know that you might eat a biscuit at X - it is already certain that you will.

Speaking metaphysically, if God exists and is transcendental - out of time (as is the common excuse theists make for compatibility) then you might say that his knowledge is actually caused by your action, its just that it doesn't make sense to speak about time X and X-1 re God. But unfortunately, if that is the case, it means that time is dependent on the observer - the passage of time must essentially be an illusion. This also means there is no sense in which we can be said to be free.

 

[aigiqinf]

Goodness me, why does this always come up? Of course not - but the fact that someone can know with certainty before the fact that something will happen means that that thing will happen. So Jesus may or may not have caused Peter to deny him, but nonetheless, Peter had no choice if Jesus was correct. And we can assume Jesus was correct, since Jesus, as God, is omniscient.

Think of it this way. In a normal weather report, the weatherman says, "It's going to be rainy tomorrow." Now, he certainly doesn't cause it to be rainy, does he? In fact, he could be wrong - it might be sunny. But, if we add the premise that the weatherman is always right - i.e. he is omniscient, then it directly follows from that premise that it will be rainy tomorrow. In argument form:

P1 - The Weatherman is always right
P2 - The Weatherman says it will rain tomorrow
C1 - It will rain tomorrow.

This is a valid logical argument - if the premises are true, the conclusion follows necessarily. But now let's swap the weatherman for God:

P1 - God is always right
P2 - God says (or knows) you will have a cup of coffee tomorrow morning
C1 - You will have a cup of coffee tomorrow morning.

Exactly the same - if the premises are true (i.e. if God is omniscient, and if he knows you will have a cup of coffee tomorrow morning) then the conclusion follows.
Now, at this very moment in time, God knows exactly what you will drink tomorrow morning - so say most theists. It is a this does not cause you to drink that thing, but it does mean that you will drink it.

But you would have drunk the coffee regardless, just because you know its going to happen doesn't mean it was preordained and you don't have the free will to choose it.
God knows what you are going to do in advance, you choose to do these things, but God already knows it. You type at your keyboard because you choose to do so, God knew you were going to type at your keyboard, but that doesn't mean he made you. You will you use your free will, God just knows it in advance.

 

[aigiqinf]

If the issue was not determined, it cannot be known, because it was still uncertain.

Let as assume that, at point in time X, you eat a biscuit. Now, at time X-1, there are two possibilities. Either, there is a chance that you will eat a biscuit at X, or it is certain that you will eat a biscuit at X.
But God is omniscient so, at time X-1, he must know that you eat a biscuit at X. He doesn't know that you might eat a biscuit at X - it is already certain that you will.

Speaking metaphysically, if God exists and is transcendental - out of time (as is the common excuse theists make for compatibility) then you might say that his knowledge is actually caused by your action, its just that it doesn't make sense to speak about time X and X-1 re God. But unfortunately, if that is the case, it means that time is dependent on the observer - the passage of time must essentially be an illusion. This also means there is no sense in which we can be said to be free.

If you flip a fair coin, and God knows where it lands. It is logical where it lands by how you flipped, how hard you flipped, and the effect of gravity. Therefore you had the freewill to flip the coin, how the coin lands was only predetermined by the obvious logic of how the coin was flipped.
Although he knew you would flip a coin and it would land on a certain side, he knew that you would use your free will to flip a coin and it would fall where physics would say it would fall.

 

[FishFace]

But you would have drunk the coffee regardless, just because you know its going to happen doesn't mean it was preordained and you don't have the free will to choose it.

You have a funny definition of free will if you can freely choose something which you can't choose not to do - because that's the implication. If God knows you're going to drink coffee, how is it a free choice? You can't choose to drink tea instead.
You've barely made an argument, I'm afraid - simply repeated your original claim that you can freely choose what is already known. But if God knows something, than that is the same as saying that it will happen, which means you can't choose for it not to happen.

Therefore, you're not free.

Of course, I'm just going on what I understand of what people mean when they say "free." It might be you disagree - but then you'd have to properly define free will, which in my experience is impossible.

 

[FishFace]

If you flip a fair coin, and God knows where it lands. It is logical where it lands by how you flipped, how hard you flipped, and the effect of gravity. Therefore you had the freewill to flip the coin, how the coin lands was only predetermined by the obvious logic of how the coin was flipped.
Although he knew you would flip a coin and it would land on a certain side, he knew that you would use your free will to flip a coin and it would fall where physics would say it would fall.

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?

 

[aigiqinf]

You have a funny definition of free will if you can freely choose something which you can't choose not to do - because that's the implication. If God knows you're going to drink coffee, how is it a free choice? You can't choose to drink tea instead.
You've barely made an argument, I'm afraid - simply repeated your original claim that you can freely choose what is already known. But if God knows something, than that is the same as saying that it will happen, which means you can't choose for it not to happen.

Therefore, you're not free.

Of course, I'm just going on what I understand of what people mean when they say "free." It might be you disagree - but then you'd have to properly define free will, which in my experience is impossible.

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.