The Modal Fallacy and the Problem of Free Will

[quatona]

??

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.

Which has never been the point in question, though.

 

[juvenissun]

Incorrect. If more than one claim is made, those claims can be analyzed through one of a number of means to determine if all can be true. For example, someone claims A is equal to B, then claims B is equal to C and then C is not equal to A. We can use very simple logic to see that not all of those can be true.

As not all three of the following can be true, one must be false. Which do you believe it to be.

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.

Sigh.

If A == B, and B == C.
God CAN make A ≠≠ C

(you can say "not true" again).

 

[talquin]

An example that pretty much puts to rest this argument is Peter being told by Jesus that he will deny him 3 times before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crows. Peter himself said he would never do that, and had free will to not do it but scripture says even with prior knowledge of the event Peter did exactly as God (Jesus) predicted.

Specifically what does that put to rest?

As I've said earlier, not all three of the following can be true. Which one (or more than one) do you believe to not be true?

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.

 

[Albion]

Not true. Infallible foreknowledge does preclude free will and vice versa.

No, it doesn't. That is your mistake, but the problem is made worse because you haven't articulated your reasons for thinking it's so. Is it because some explanations given by some Christians who are not great theologians seem lame to you? If that's it, you're only shooting ducks in a barrel, not dealing with the issue itself.

If you really believe that foreknowledge doesn't preclude free will, then please tell me which of the following is wrong:

No, you explain your point in normal terms and I'll react to it.

I have already explained that foreknowledge does not preclude freewill, and I've done it without forcing you to choose one of three answers I've chosen in advance and that reflect my own conclusions on the matter.

 

[talquin]

Sigh.

If A == B, and B == C.
God CAN make A ≠≠ C

(you can say "not true" again).

If A is not equal to C, then both A = B and B = C can't be true.

You still haven't answered my question:

As not all three of the following can be true, one must be false. Which do you believe it to be.

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.

 

[Smidlee]

This has nothing to do with the scenario which I have drawn up.

BTW, when I say "faced with a choice of A or B", it doesn't mean that C is an option. A or B is identical to A or "not A".

You have a choice between A and not "A" but God has both "A" and "not- A" worked in His ultimate plan. The scriptures teaches you have free will of your actions but not the reactions of your choice as God decides that.

David's sin didn't stop God's plan as Solomon was in line of Jesus Christ but that doesn't mean it was God's direct plan. If David followed God's direct plan his seed would still be in line of Christ without the sword enter in his household.

 

[talquin]

No, it doesn't. That is your mistake, but the problem is made worse because you haven't articulated your reasons for thinking it's so. Is it because some explanations given by some Christians who are not great theologians seem lame to you? If that's it, you're only shooting ducks in a barrel, not dealing with the issue itself.


No, you explain your point in normal terms and I'll react to it.

I have already explained that foreknowledge does not preclude freewill, and I've done it without forcing you to choose one of three answers I've chosen in advance.

Please help me better understand what point you're trying to make. I can better understand it if you answer the following:

As not all three of the following can be true, one must be false. Which do you believe it to be.

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.

 

[talquin]

Yu have a choice between A and not "A" but God has both "A" and "not- A" worked in His ultimate plan. The scriptures teaches you have free will of your actions but not the reactions of your choice as God decides that.

So you are saying humans do not have the freedom to choose how they react to a choice they make. If so, then please explain the physiological process which occurred in your body which caused you to react as you did after choosing to read this post of mine.

 

[Albion]

Please help me better understand what point you're trying to make. I can better understand it if you answer the following:

As not all three of the following can be true, one must be false. Which do you believe it to be.

My point is that you are apparently presenting us with a stacked deck.

The only answers you allow are the ones you prearrange.

You will not put them in normal language, nor your basic proposition.

And you are, by your own admission, not showing that foreknowledge precludes freewill, but rather that several answers you allege are typical of some Christians are, in fact, defective.

But if you are going to answer me for the fifth time or so by simply reposting the exact same choices in the same words, we have no way to move forward.

 

[Smidlee]

So you are saying humans do not have the freedom to choose how they react to a choice they make. If so, then please explain the physiological process which occurred in your body which caused you to react as you did after choosing to read this post of mine.

I didn't say humans doesn't have the freedom to choose how they react but you don't decide the effect and/or events after you have made a choice.

 

[talquin]

My point is that you are apparently presenting us with a stacked deck.

The only answers you allow are the ones you prearrange.

You will not put them in normal language, nor your basic proposition.

And you are, by your own admission, not showing that foreknowledge precludes freewill, but rather that several answers you allege are typical of some Christians are, in fact, defective.

But if you are going to answer me for the fifth time or so by simply reposting the exact same choices in the same words, we have no way to move forward.

Nothing stacked about the deck. That is unless you are trying to say that these claims are representative of only a small portion of Christians.

The three representations show that it is logically impossible for anyone or anything to have infallible knowledge of freely made choices which have yet to be made.

If there is something about any of these three that you don't understand, please let me know and I'll be happy to clarify.

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.

 

[talquin]

I didn't say humans doesn't have the freedom to choose how they react but you don't decide the effect and/or events after you have made a choice.

Not necessarily true. Let's say you choose A out of an A/B choice. As a result of choosing A you are then faced with a choice of C or D. You then choose C out of a C/D choice. The event of you choosing C as opposed to D was an event which you decided, as you could have chosen D.

 

[Smidlee]

Nothing stacked about the deck. That is unless you are trying to say that these claims are representative of only a small portion of Christians.

The three representations show that it is logically impossible for anyone or anything to have infallible knowledge of freely made choices which have yet to be made.

If there is something about any of these three that you don't understand, please let me know and I'll be happy to clarify.

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.

This is where I think you logic fails. You assume God didn't allow Fred to make a choice so the results was locked before that event happen. Christians doesn't support that view. Just because Jesus foreknew that the Jews would reject "The Kingdom of Heaven" doesn't mean it wasn't a genuine offer.

 

[Albion]

This is where I think you logic fails. You assume God didn't allow Fred to make a choice so the results was locked before that event happen. Christians doesn't support that view. Just because Jesus foreknew that the Jews would reject "The Kingdom of Heaven" doesn't mean it wasn't a genuine offer.

Correct.

So again, we could "prove" some people wrong in their particular answers, but it cannot be proven that foreknowledge = predetermination.

 

[talquin]

This is where I think you logic fails. You assume God didn't allow Fred to make a choice so the results was locked before that event happen. Christians doesn't support that view. Just because Jesus foreknew that the Jews would reject "The Kingdom of Heaven" doesn't mean it wasn't a genuine offer.

If Fred can freely make the choice on day 2 (or Y can be freely assigned an A or B value on day 2), then both of the following can't be true:

X = Y (What God knows Fred will choose is what Fred will choose)

X has a fixed value on day 1 (As of day 1, God knows what Fred's day 2 A/B choice will be)

 

[Albion]

If Fred can freely make the choice on day 2 (or Y can be freely assigned an A or B value on day 2), then both of the following can't be true:

X = Y (What God knows Fred will choose is what Fred will choose)

X has a fixed value on day 1 (As of day 1, God knows what Fred's day 2 A/B choice will be)

Actually, both are true. God knows on both day 1 and day 2 what Fred will choose...and it is unknown to Fred himself as he exercises his free will.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Specifically what does that put to rest?

As I've said earlier, not all three of the following can be true. Which one (or more than one) do you believe to not be true?

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.

The example in the Bible is what DID happen and shows how God both allows free will and choice and predicts the choice of Peter in it all. There is no need to create a logic problem to try and explain how free will and God predicting the future coincide together.

 

[True Scotsman]

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

So far as we know, man is the supreme being, if by supreme you mean the greatest. Man possesses five senses just like many of the higher animals, but in addition he possesses a conceptual faculty. This is what separates us from all other living things on Earth. It is the faculty which organizes, identifies and integrates the material gathered by his senses. This faculty allows us to deal with an enormous amount of data. It does this by selective attention to the essential properties of a group of things while omitting the non essential qualities(measurement omission) thereby forming a concept of that class of things which subsumes an unlimited number of instances.

The concept "man" for instance includes all men, future, present and past. The conceptual faculty is man's fundamental attribute. It's what makes him man. This is the attribute that man possesses with respect to knowledge.

 

[talquin]

Actually, both are true. God knows on both day 1 and day 2 what Fred will choose...and it is unknown to Fred himself as he exercises his free will.

Let's say as of day 1, God knows that Fred's day 2 A/B choice will be A. (or variable X has the value of A on day 1). Fred then freely chooses B on day 2 (or assigns variable Y a value of B on day 2). What does this do to the fact that God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 A/B choice must always be in alignment with what Fred chooses (or that variable X is equal to variable Y)?

 

[talquin]

The example in the Bible is what DID happen and shows how God both allows free will and choice and predicts the choice of Peter in it all. There is no need to create a logic problem to try and explain how free will and God predicting the future coincide together.

Please help me understand your line of thinking. Which one of the three below do you believe to not be true? If there is something about any of these that doesn't make sense, please let me know and I'll clarify.

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.