The Modal Fallacy and the Problem of Free Will

[talquin]

Christians often make the claim that God knows everything. If asked for specifics, they’ll say this includes knowledge about the future (foreknowledge) and that such knowledge is infallible. Christians also often make the claim that man has free will. Upon being asked for specifics, they’ll agree that free will entails the ability to freely make a choice. At quick glance, these claims may not appear to be in conflict. However, if we dig a little deeper into each of these claims, we’ll see that they are.

Let’s say Fred is faced with a free choice of A or B. He is due to make this choice on Tuesday (day 2). We’ll call Fred’s day 2 A/B choice variable Y. This means prior to day 2, variable Y has no value (or the choice lies in an unmade state), and on day 2, variable Y will acquire a value of either A or B – to be decided freely by Fred.

Given the Christian claim that God has infallible foreknowledge, this would mean God knows infallibly what A/B choice Fred will make when the choice still lies in an unmade state. To gain further clarity on this, it can be asked, “if it were asked on day 1 does God know infallibly what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be, would the answer be YES?”. Christians would typically agree.
If asked for further specifics, such as what if Fred chooses something in conflict with what God knows he will choose, Christians will respond with the assertion that Fred will choose whatever God knows he will choose.

So we’ll call God’s day 1 knowledge of Fred’s day 2 A/B choice variable X. If as of day 1, God knows infallibly what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be, then it follows that X has a static or fixed value of either A or B as of day 1.

We now have three conditions:

1) X (or God's knowledge as of day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a value of either A or B on day 1 and this value is fixed and cannot change. If it is A, it will remain A. If it is B, it will remain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

2) Y (or Fred’s day 2 A/B choice) receives its value on day 2. Once Y receives its value, it becomes locked. Prior to receiving its value, it could potentially become A or B, as Fred freely chooses A or B. This follows the assertion that Fred has free will or can freely make choices.

3) X is equal to Y. This follows the assertion that whatever Fred chooses is precisely the same as what God knew he would choose.
Not all three of these conditions can be true.

If #1 & #2 are true, then #3 can’t be true, as X wouldn’t be equal to Y, nor would Y be equal to X. Not only would X receive a value at a different point in time than Y, but Y could be assigned a value in conflict with the static value of X.

If #1 & #3 are true, then #2 can’t be true. Fred wouldn’t be able to freely choose A or B, as variable Y would already be defined as being equal to variable X. Christians will often argue that God's knowledge of Fred’s future choice is a function of Fred’s day 2 choice. But this doesn’t hold true if the answer to the question “if asked on day 1, does God know what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be?” is YES.

If #2 & #3 are true, then #1 can’t be true. What this means is if variable Y gets its value on day 2, then variable X also gets its value on day 2 and gets the same value as variable Y. It then follows that God can’t have infallible knowledge on day 1 of Fred’s day 2 A/B choice.

Therefore, it is logically impossible for God (or anyone) to have infallible foreknowledge of a yet to be made free choice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've presented this scenario to several theists and non-theists and most of the responses I get involve them reconciling it by changing the claims which I'm responding to. Among them:

1) Instead of man being able to freely choose A or B, they'll assert that a free choice doesn't actually occur or that everything is pre-determined (I think the word is deterministic). This would mean that we are all actually robots. However, their claim is flawed, because upon my asking the question "up until the time you choose A out of an A/B choice, could you still have chosen B?", they will always say YES.

2) God is outside of time and doesn't have knowledge "as of day 1". It then follows that it would be irresponsible and a misrepresentation to say that on day 1, God has knowledge of day 2 events, as their claim is God doesn't have his knowledge on day 1. This claim is also flawed, as upon asking them if X (or what God knows as of day 1) has a value on day 1, they will agree it does. Furthermore, if one asks a question about the status of something without mentioning a particular point in time, the assumed point in time is the present. For example, if I say, "I own 12 cats", this doesn't mean I always own 12 cats, nor does it mean I own 12 cats at some point in the future and nor does it mean I owned 12 cats yesterday. It means I own 12 cats at the moment I made the statement - unless specified otherwise, such as "I owned 12 cats a week ago" or "I always own 12 cats". Similarly, if one were to say, "God knows what Fred will choose tomorrow", it means as of the moment the statement is made.

 

[Colter]

Christians often make the claim that God knows everything. If asked for specifics, they’ll say this includes knowledge about the future (foreknowledge) and that such knowledge is infallible. Christians also often make the claim that man has free will. Upon being asked for specifics, they’ll agree that free will entails the ability to freely make a choice. At quick glance, these claims may not appear to be in conflict. However, if we dig a little deeper into each of these claims, we’ll see that they are.

Let’s say Fred is faced with a free choice of A or B. He is due to make this choice on Tuesday (day 2). We’ll call Fred’s day 2 A/B choice variable Y. This means prior to day 2, variable Y has no value (or the choice lies in an unmade state), and on day 2, variable Y will acquire a value of either A or B – to be decided freely by Fred.

Given the Christian claim that God has infallible foreknowledge, this would mean God knows infallibly what A/B choice Fred will make when the choice still lies in an unmade state. To gain further clarity on this, it can be asked, “if it were asked on day 1 does God know infallibly what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be, would the answer be YES?”. Christians would typically agree.
If asked for further specifics, such as what if Fred chooses something in conflict with what God knows he will choose, Christians will respond with the assertion that Fred will choose whatever God knows he will choose.

So we’ll call God’s day 1 knowledge of Fred’s day 2 A/B choice variable X. If as of day 1, God knows infallibly what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be, then it follows that X has a static or fixed value of either A or B as of day 1.

We now have three conditions:

1) X (or God's knowledge as of day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a value of either A or B on day 1 and this value is fixed and cannot change. If it is A, it will remain A. If it is B, it will remain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

2) Y (or Fred’s day 2 A/B choice) receives its value on day 2. Once Y receives its value, it becomes locked. Prior to receiving its value, it could potentially become A or B, as Fred freely chooses A or B. This follows the assertion that Fred has free will or can freely make choices.

3) X is equal to Y. This follows the assertion that whatever Fred chooses is precisely the same as what God knew he would choose.
Not all three of these conditions can be true.

If #1 & #2 are true, then #3 can’t be true, as X wouldn’t be equal to Y, nor would Y be equal to X. Not only would X receive a value at a different point in time than Y, but Y could be assigned a value in conflict with the static value of X.

If #1 & #3 are true, then #2 can’t be true. Fred wouldn’t be able to freely choose A or B, as variable Y would already be defined as being equal to variable X. Christians will often argue that God's knowledge of Fred’s future choice is a function of Fred’s day 2 choice. But this doesn’t hold true if the answer to the question “if asked on day 1, does God know what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be?” is YES.

If #2 & #3 are true, then #1 can’t be true. What this means is if variable Y gets its value on day 2, then variable X also gets its value on day 2 and gets the same value as variable Y. It then follows that God can’t have infallible knowledge on day 1 of Fred’s day 2 A/B choice.

Therefore, it is logically impossible for God (or anyone) to have infallible foreknowledge of a yet to be made free choice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've presented this scenario to several theists and non-theists and most of the responses I get involve them reconciling it by changing the claims which I'm responding to. Among them:

1) Instead of man being able to freely choose A or B, they'll assert that a free choice doesn't actually occur or that everything is pre-determined (I think the word is deterministic). This would mean that we are all actually robots. However, their claim is flawed, because upon my asking the question "up until the time you choose A out of an A/B choice, could you still have chosen B?", they will always say YES.

2) God is outside of time and doesn't have knowledge "as of day 1". It then follows that it would be irresponsible and a misrepresentation to say that on day 1, God has knowledge of day 2 events, as their claim is God doesn't have his knowledge on day 1. This claim is also flawed, as upon asking them if X (or what God knows as of day 1) has a value on day 1, they will agree it does. Furthermore, if one asks a question about the status of something without mentioning a particular point in time, the assumed point in time is the present. For example, if I say, "I own 12 cats", this doesn't mean I always own 12 cats, nor does it mean I own 12 cats at some point in the future and nor does it mean I owned 12 cats yesterday. It means I own 12 cats at the moment I made the statement - unless specified otherwise, such as "I owned 12 cats a week ago" or "I always own 12 cats". Similarly, if one were to say, "God knows what Fred will choose tomorrow", it means as of the moment the statement is made.

God is everywhere and every when. Its not a matter of knowing the future for God, he is already there. The I AM is absolute, eternal and infinite. That is an incomprehensible reality for the finite mind, who is subject to time, to grasp.

It would be more accurate to say God knows the past, the decisions that you already made.




.

 

[True Scotsman]

God is everywhere and every when. Its not a matter of knowing the future for God, he is already there. The I AM is absolute, eternal and infinite. That is an incomprehensible reality for the finite mind, who is subject to time, to grasp.

It would be more accurate to say God knows the past, the decisions that you already made.




.

Since I don't consider the concept of supernatural being possessing perfect foreknowledge of everything to be valid, this is not a problem I need consider.

 

[Albion]

In fact, God's foreknowledge does not in any way affect the decisions made by the individual. He merely knows what will be chosen.

But of course, only some Christians believe that we have free will in all things. The point of dispute is whether or not we have the capability of choosing God, considering that we have no facts sufficient on which to know that God. On other, more routine matters, there's a general agreement that Man does have free will.

BTW, neither of the points labeled 1) and 2) at the bottom of your post alter anything about this, even though I agree with you that some people do employ them. They'd be better off not doing that, since there is no contradiction between God's foreknowledge and Man's free will, except as I've explained.

Christians often make the claim that God knows everything. If asked for specifics, they’ll say this includes knowledge about the future (foreknowledge) and that such knowledge is infallible. Christians also often make the claim that man has free will. Upon being asked for specifics, they’ll agree that free will entails the ability to freely make a choice. At quick glance, these claims may not appear to be in conflict. However, if we dig a little deeper into each of these claims, we’ll see that they are.

Let’s say Fred is faced with a free choice of A or B. He is due to make this choice on Tuesday (day 2). We’ll call Fred’s day 2 A/B choice variable Y. This means prior to day 2, variable Y has no value (or the choice lies in an unmade state), and on day 2, variable Y will acquire a value of either A or B – to be decided freely by Fred.

Given the Christian claim that God has infallible foreknowledge, this would mean God knows infallibly what A/B choice Fred will make when the choice still lies in an unmade state. To gain further clarity on this, it can be asked, “if it were asked on day 1 does God know infallibly what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be, would the answer be YES?”. Christians would typically agree.
If asked for further specifics, such as what if Fred chooses something in conflict with what God knows he will choose, Christians will respond with the assertion that Fred will choose whatever God knows he will choose.

So we’ll call God’s day 1 knowledge of Fred’s day 2 A/B choice variable X. If as of day 1, God knows infallibly what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be, then it follows that X has a static or fixed value of either A or B as of day 1.

We now have three conditions:

1) X (or God's knowledge as of day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a value of either A or B on day 1 and this value is fixed and cannot change. If it is A, it will remain A. If it is B, it will remain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

2) Y (or Fred’s day 2 A/B choice) receives its value on day 2. Once Y receives its value, it becomes locked. Prior to receiving its value, it could potentially become A or B, as Fred freely chooses A or B. This follows the assertion that Fred has free will or can freely make choices.

3) X is equal to Y. This follows the assertion that whatever Fred chooses is precisely the same as what God knew he would choose.
Not all three of these conditions can be true.

If #1 & #2 are true, then #3 can’t be true, as X wouldn’t be equal to Y, nor would Y be equal to X. Not only would X receive a value at a different point in time than Y, but Y could be assigned a value in conflict with the static value of X.

If #1 & #3 are true, then #2 can’t be true. Fred wouldn’t be able to freely choose A or B, as variable Y would already be defined as being equal to variable X. Christians will often argue that God's knowledge of Fred’s future choice is a function of Fred’s day 2 choice. But this doesn’t hold true if the answer to the question “if asked on day 1, does God know what Fred’s day 2 A/B choice will be?” is YES.

If #2 & #3 are true, then #1 can’t be true. What this means is if variable Y gets its value on day 2, then variable X also gets its value on day 2 and gets the same value as variable Y. It then follows that God can’t have infallible knowledge on day 1 of Fred’s day 2 A/B choice.

Therefore, it is logically impossible for God (or anyone) to have infallible foreknowledge of a yet to be made free choice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've presented this scenario to several theists and non-theists and most of the responses I get involve them reconciling it by changing the claims which I'm responding to. Among them:

1) Instead of man being able to freely choose A or B, they'll assert that a free choice doesn't actually occur or that everything is pre-determined (I think the word is deterministic). This would mean that we are all actually robots. However, their claim is flawed, because upon my asking the question "up until the time you choose A out of an A/B choice, could you still have chosen B?", they will always say YES.

2) God is outside of time and doesn't have knowledge "as of day 1". It then follows that it would be irresponsible and a misrepresentation to say that on day 1, God has knowledge of day 2 events, as their claim is God doesn't have his knowledge on day 1. This claim is also flawed, as upon asking them if X (or what God knows as of day 1) has a value on day 1, they will agree it does. Furthermore, if one asks a question about the status of something without mentioning a particular point in time, the assumed point in time is the present. For example, if I say, "I own 12 cats", this doesn't mean I always own 12 cats, nor does it mean I own 12 cats at some point in the future and nor does it mean I owned 12 cats yesterday. It means I own 12 cats at the moment I made the statement - unless specified otherwise, such as "I owned 12 cats a week ago" or "I always own 12 cats". Similarly, if one were to say, "God knows what Fred will choose tomorrow", it means as of the moment the statement is made.

 

[quatona]

God is everywhere and every when. Its not a matter of knowing the future for God, he is already there. The I AM is absolute, eternal and infinite. That is an incomprehensible reality for the finite mind, who is subject to time, to grasp.

Thus, coming from you the finite mind, it´s not an explanation of sorts.

It would be more accurate to say God knows the past, the decisions that you already made.

All of which would raise quite some questions concerning God´s act of creation.

 

[Colter]

Thus, coming from you the finite mind, it´s not an explanation of sorts.


All of which would raise quite some questions concerning God´s act of creation.

There goes "drive by Quatona" with his customary snarky hit with nothing to back it up.

 

[quatona]

There goes "drive by Quatona" with his customary snarky hit with nothing to back it up.

I love you, too.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

I'mFreeeeeeee!

[wait on, dont spoil the show]

 

[Radagast]

Christians often make the claim that God knows everything. If asked for specifics, they’ll say this includes knowledge about the future (foreknowledge) and that such knowledge is infallible. Christians also often make the claim that man has free will. Upon being asked for specifics, they’ll agree that free will entails the ability to freely make a choice.

Many books have been written on this topic. This post doesn't add to the debate in any way, unfortunately.

Only someone ignorant of the topic would use the phrase "free will" without specifying what kind of free will was intended (there are multiple definitions). Not to mention the circularity of "free will entails the ability to freely make a choice," and your implicit assumption that God is limited by time.

 

[DogmaHunter]

In fact, God's foreknowledge does not in any way affect the decisions made by the individual. He merely knows what will be chosen.

That's a contradiction in terms.

If it is known beforehand what I will choose, then that can only mean that my choices or predestined to be what they will be. Which in turn means that I don't have the actual freedom (or free will) to choose differently.

Free will and perfect foreknowledge cannot coexist in the same universe.

 

[juvenissun]

Christians often make the claim that God knows everything. If asked for specifics, they’ll say this includes knowledge about the future (foreknowledge) and that such knowledge is infallible. Christians also often make the claim that man has free will. Upon being asked for specifics, they’ll agree that free will entails the ability to freely make a choice. At quick glance, these claims may not appear to be in conflict. However, if we dig a little deeper into each of these claims, we’ll see that they are.

....

This should be a lesson to you. When you really understand, it will also save you a lot of time (not to make meaningless effort).

Is time traveling ever make logic sense to you? If not, then you can save 95% of the words in your OP. If it does, then what you said are all irrelevant.

 

[Albion]

That's a contradiction in terms.

Not at all. It may seem that way to you at first, but it's not. What would be a contradiction would be predetermination. But foreknowledge in no way binds the hands of the person making the decisions, nor does that--believing God to foreknow the decisions--influence his choices.

If it is known beforehand what I will choose, then that can only mean that my choices or predestined to be what they will be.

Nope. Knowing the future and causing the future to be what it is are two different things. If I, for example, know that night will follow day, I am in no way making it happen--and that's not even a perfect parallel to the matter of God's knowing, of course.

Free will and perfect foreknowledge cannot coexist in the same universe.

If you think that, you've only tricked yourself. And I don't see any evidence or even a good argument from anyone that to know the future is to make it happen.

 

[talquin]

God is everywhere and every when. Its not a matter of knowing the future for God, he is already there. The I AM is absolute, eternal and infinite. That is an incomprehensible reality for the finite mind, who is subject to time, to grasp.

It would be more accurate to say God knows the past, the decisions that you already made.
.

Thanks for the response. Given the attributes of the god you believe in, would you say that variable X (or God's knowledge at point in time day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a static or fixed value at any point in time prior to day 2 when Fred freely makes his A/B choice?

 

[quatona]

Nope. Knowing the future and causing the future to be what it is are two different things.

Indeed, and that´s why nobody claimed that foreknowledge causes the future to be what it is, in the first place. So you are trying to refute an argument that hadn´t been made.

 

[talquin]

Since I don't consider the concept of supernatural being possessing perfect foreknowledge of everything to be valid, this is not a problem I need consider.

So what kind of supreme being do you believe in? What attributes do you think it has with respect to knowledge?

 

[Smidlee]

That's a contradiction in terms.

If it is known beforehand what I will choose, then that can only mean that my choices or predestined to be what they will be. Which in turn means that I don't have the actual freedom (or free will) to choose differently.

Free will and perfect foreknowledge cannot coexist in the same universe.

Just because I have a foreknowledge of what would happen if I jump off a 50 story building doesn't mean I don't have a free will to jump or not.

I have the free will in my actions (jump off a 50 story building) but not the reactions of those my actions (gravity).

 

[talquin]

In fact, God's foreknowledge does not in any way affect the decisions made by the individual. He merely knows what will be chosen.

But of course, only some Christians believe that we have free will in all things. The point of dispute is whether or not we have the capability of choosing God, considering that we have no facts sufficient on which to know that God. On other, more routine matters, there's a general agreement that Man does have free will.

BTW, neither of the points labeled 1) and 2) at the bottom of your post alter anything about this, even though I agree with you that some people do employ them. They'd be better off not doing that, since there is no contradiction between God's foreknowledge and Man's free will, except as I've explained.

If there is no conflict between God's foreknowledge and Man's free will, then which of the following is wrong:

1) X (or God's knowledge as of day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a value of either A or B on day 1 and this value is fixed and cannot change. If it is A, it will remain A. If it is B, it will remain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

2) Y (or Fred’s day 2 A/B choice) receives its value on day 2. Once Y receives its value, it becomes locked. Prior to receiving its value, it could potentially become A or B, as Fred freely chooses A or B. This follows the assertion that Fred has free will or can freely make choices.

3) X is equal to Y. This follows the assertion that whatever Fred chooses is precisely the same as what God knew he would choose.

 

[quatona]

If I, for example, know that night will follow day, I am in no way making it happen

Indeed (and again: that´s not even been the claim), but the fact that you *know it* is a strong indication that the sun, earth and other involved factors don´t have a free choice to act otherwise.

 

[talquin]

Many books have been written on this topic. This post doesn't add to the debate in any way, unfortunately.

Only someone ignorant of the topic would use the phrase "free will" without specifying what kind of free will was intended (there are multiple definitions). Not to mention the circularity of "free will entails the ability to freely make a choice," and your implicit assumption that God is limited by time.

For the purposes of this discussion, "free will" means that up until the time one chooses A out of an A/B choice, they could have chosen B. Perhaps I should have included this in the body rather than in the 2 counter arguments below.

If my argument is flawed, then which of the following is wrong:

1) X (or God's knowledge as of day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a value of either A or B on day 1 and this value is fixed and cannot change. If it is A, it will remain A. If it is B, it will remain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

2) Y (or Fred’s day 2 A/B choice) receives its value on day 2. Once Y receives its value, it becomes locked. Prior to receiving its value, it could potentially become A or B, as Fred freely chooses A or B. This follows the assertion that Fred has free will or can freely make choices.

3) X is equal to Y. This follows the assertion that whatever Fred chooses is precisely the same as what God knew he would choose.
Not all three of these conditions can be true.

 

[Albion]

Indeed (and again: that´s not even been the claim), but the fact that you *know it* is a strong indication that the sun, earth and other involved factors don´t have a free choice to act otherwise.

??

It doesn't matter if these unthinking objects do what they do. The point still stands that to know what will happen does not mean causing it to happen.