The Problem of Free Will

[talquin]

Let's say variable X represents God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 a/b choice. It sounds like you're saying variable X has a truth value (that it holds a value of either A or B) as of "t0", or at all times prior to day 2. Agree?

Not quite. Not only does X have a truth value from the perspective of this god from t0 to the time the choice is made (let's say t2), it has a truth value for all time after t2 (t3, t4, t5...). For Fred, it only has a truth value after t2. There's no contradiction in that because the frames of reference are different. You seem to keep forgetting that for the god concept I'm talking about everything can be said to be in the past. Remember that this god "lives" at tx but can see the past (t0, t1, t2...) perfectly and travel to the past.

When I say has a truth value, I don't mean from a subjective POV. I mean objectively. At any given point in time, variable X is one of the three: equal to A; equal to B or has no value - regardless of whose perspective it is.

Do you also agree that if Fred freely makes his A/B choice on day 2, and variable Y represents Fred's day 2 A/B choice, that variable Y receives its value on day 2. Correct?

From Fred's perspective, yes.

I don't mean from Fred's perspective. I mean the objective truth - regardless of what Fred's perspective is. So again: if Fred freely makes his A/B choice on day 2, and variable Y represents Fred's day 2 A/B choice, that variable Y receives its value on day 2. Correct?

If you agree with both of those, then you would hold an implicit belief that Fred can't freely choose either A or B, but is bound to choose whatever variable X is equal to.

False. Fred is free to choose what he wants. God knows what Fred did choose, not what Fred will choose. It's the differences in the frames of reference that prevent the violation of free will. It seems like you want to say that no one has free will since in the past, all choices are already made.

If Fred is free to choose either A or B, then what happens if variable X is A (or God's knowledge of Fred's choice is A) and Fred freely chooses B?

Or are you contending that variable X (god's knowledge) is a function of variable Y (fred's choice)? If you are, then you have contradicted yourself.

 

[scientia]

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 willremain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

This is impossible. The mind cannot be predicted that far ahead even with a perfect scan at some point in time.

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.

I'm not quite sure of the form you put it in but Fred can choose either A or B unless he has a compelling reason not to. For example, if you had a choice of A) Receiving an ice cream cone or B) Getting attacked by a Rottweiler, you would probably choose A every time. Unless

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 impossible. God would have no way of knowing unless the choice were obvious.

 

[Albion]

So let's say that variable X is A. Fred then freely chooses B. What happens to God's knowledge that Fred would choose A?

God would not have seen Fred choosing A (or known him to be going to choose A, if that's a better way to say it), only to have him choose B instead. That would be impossible.

 

[Radagast]

Let me see if I can think of how to put this.
If God exists, it would be impossible for him to have foreknowledge. This is true unless you can disprove the Uncertainty Principle

Not so. Divine foreknowledge is perfectly compatible with the UP.

If the world were completely deterministic then creating it would have been a waste of time

That's an opinion, not a proof of anything.

I would also remind you of the CF rule on Blasphemy: It is considered blasphemy to insult or mock Christianity or any part of the Trinity-Father (God), Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. Honest debate about the nature of God and Christian Theology is allowed, but derogatory remarks are not.

A completely deterministic universe is incompatible with classic, philosophical arguments for free will

Not so. There is plenty of room in classic, philosophical free-will arguments for "compatibilist" free will and determinism.

 

[talquin]

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 willremain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

This is impossible. The mind cannot be predicted that far ahead even with a perfect scan at some point in time.

If one posits a god which knows everything, it wouldn't need to make predictions, as it already knows.

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.

I'm not quite sure of the form you put it in but Fred can choose either A or B unless he has a compelling reason not to. For example, if you had a choice of A) Receiving an ice cream cone or B) Getting attacked by a Rottweiler, you would probably choose A every time. Unless

Some Christians say if God knows Fred is going to choose A, then Fred is compelled to choose A. But that is a straw man argument, as I'm responding to claims that Fred can freely choose A or B.

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 impossible. God would have no way of knowing unless the choice were obvious.

If God knows everything without anything else being presupposed, how could it be impossible for God to know what Fred will choose?

 

[scientia]

Not so. Divine foreknowledge is perfectly compatible with the UP.

That assertion appears ludicrous. However, if you can explain how God can bypass the Uncertainty Principle without negating the UP, I'll listen.

That's an opinion, not a proof of anything.

It's not an opinion; it's a logical assertion. Let me state it more formally.
1.) If God created a universe that was completely deterministic then God would know everything that would happen before he created it.
2.) Since God would know everything that would happen without creating it then there would be no known reason to actually create it. The equivalent in scientific terms would be a thought experiment.

I would also remind you of the CF rule on Blasphemy: It is considered blasphemy to insult or mock Christianity or any part of the Trinity-Father (God), Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. Honest debate about the nature of God and Christian Theology is allowed, but derogatory remarks are not.

I think you are misunderstanding my remarks. I was making no assertion about Christian theology. A scientist would not bother to do an experiment that was already solved with a thought experiment just as most people would not generally engage in pointless behavior. Likewise I can't think of any reason why a creator god (Christian or otherwise) would either. You are free to assert that any deity that you personally believe in has a purpose beyond your knowledge but that has nothing to do with my point.

Not so. There is plenty of room in classic, philosophical free-will arguments for "compatibilist" free will and determinism.

That's my fault. I used the word deterministic differently from Determinism.

You are correct that Compatibilism asserts both Determinism and Free Will.
Determinism in this use means that the mind is dependent on physical properties of the brain (which is correct).

However, machine states in a computer are deterministic meaning that they are known and predictable. Starting at time T0, you will know exactly what the machine state will be at time Tn if you know the initial machine state and what is in any memory location that is read. The linguistic equivalent of a simple computer is a Finite Automaton. These again only have one possible machine state at any future time if the inputs are known. You can also do programming by Lambda Calculus or Predicate Calculus. These too are completely deterministic. However, brains are not deterministic. It is impossible to know the future state of a brain. Again, that is my fault for using a similar word with a different meaning.

 

[talquin]

So let's say that variable X is A. Fred then freely chooses B. What happens to God's knowledge that Fred would choose A?

God would not have seen Fred choosing A (or known him to be going to choose A, if that's a better way to say it), only to have him choose B instead. That would be impossible.

So the instant Fred chooses B, God's knowledge changes from Fred choosing A to Fred choosing B. But his knowledge from prior to when Fred made his choice would be wrong. Therefore, you're proving my point that God can't have infallible foreknowledge if Fred can freely choose either A or B.

 

[scientia]

If one posits a god which knows everything, it wouldn't need to make predictions, as it already knows.

I agree. In a hypothetical universe with different laws of physics such a god could very well know everything. However, this would also make human minds impossible.

Some Christians say if God knows Fred is going to choose A, then Fred is compelled to choose A. But that is a straw man argument, as I'm responding to claims that Fred can freely choose A or B.

By the known laws of physics and known human behavior, Fred is free to choose.

If God knows everything without anything else being presupposed, how could it be impossible for God to know what Fred will choose?

Again, in this universe, even if someone knew exactly what Fred's mental state was at a given point, Fred's choice would still not be predictable a day later. I'm saying that I don't know of a way for both to exist. Either foreknowledge is real or human minds are real. And, since I am writing this, it is my assumption that human minds are real. Therefore, foreknowledge cannot be. I don't know of anything that would get around these limitations. Even if God existed outside this universe or had infinite power it still would not provide this information since that information does not exist.

 

[talquin]

I agree. In a hypothetical universe with different laws of physics such a god could very well know everything. However, this would also make human minds impossible.


By the known laws of physics and known human behavior, Fred is free to choose.

Precisely. And it would follow that if Fred is free to choose either A or B, then it would be impossible for anyone or anything to infallibly know what Fred will choose at a point in time prior to when Fred makes his choice. So if anything does know what Fred's choice is, it can only know it after Fred makes his choice.

Again, in this universe, even if someone knew exactly what Fred's mental state was at a given point, Fred's choice would still not be predictable a day later. I'm saying that I don't know of a way for both to exist. Either foreknowledge is real or human minds are real. And, since I am writing this, it is my assumption that human minds are real. Therefore, foreknowledge cannot be. I don't know of anything that would get around these limitations. Even if God existed outside this universe or had infinite power it still would not provide this information since that information does not exist.

"predictable" doesn't apply if there is nothing to predict. If Fred's choice has already been made, then there is nothing to predict about it.

 

[Radagast]

That assertion appears ludicrous. However, if you can explain how God can bypass the Uncertainty Principle without negating the UP, I'll listen.

The UP is an explanation of what we observe. Even if some events act like random dice rolls, it's perfectly possible that God already has a list of all the dice roll results. In fact, even without stepping outside the standard physics, Bell's Theorem allows for nonlocal hidden-variable explanations... and we Christians actually believe that God is outside the rules of the system.

It's not an opinion; it's a logical assertion. Let me state it more formally.
1.) If God created a universe that was completely deterministic then God would know everything that would happen before he created it.
2.) Since God would know everything that would happen without creating it then there would be no known reason to actually create it. The equivalent in scientific terms would be a thought experiment.

It's still your opinion that it would be pointless. Obviously we Christians would disagree.

And even at a human level... I once made an object even though I knew ahead of time exactly what the object would look like.

I think you are misunderstanding my remarks.

You were applying offensive and blasphemous terms like "fool" to God. Please don't do that.

You are correct that Compatibilism asserts both Determinism and Free Will.

Thank you. And the Determinism in that philosophical sense can be Determinism of any kind... whether physical, or resulting from foreknowledge.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

When I say has a truth value, I don't mean from a subjective POV. I mean objectively. At any given point in time, variable X is one of the three: equal to A; equal to B or has no value - regardless of whose perspective it is.

I'm not saying it's subjective. Objectively, this god knows that Fred freely chose (Pay attention to the language I'm using. I didn't say "will choose") at t2 and all other points on the timeline (t0 to tx), since god lives at tx, and everything is the past. Fred only can objectively confirm his choice after t2 because he experiences time lineraly. There's nothing subjective about it.

I don't mean from Fred's perspective. I mean the objective truth - regardless of what Fred's perspective is. So again: if Fred freely makes his A/B choice on day 2, and variable Y represents Fred's day 2 A/B choice, that variable Y receives its value on day 2. Correct?

For Fred, yes. This god lives at tx (the end of time), which allows it to see all of history as if it's the past.

If Fred is free to choose either A or B, then what happens if variable X is A (or God's knowledge of Fred's choice is A) and Fred freely chooses B?

It's nonsensical to think that a god who can objectively see that Fred has already chosen B chose A instead. So your situation above wouldn't happen.

If you saw a videotape of me eating lunch yesterday, and you know the videotape is accurate, would you say that I ate something other than I did? I wouldn't, because that would be insane...

Or are you contending that variable X (god's knowledge) is a function of variable Y (fred's choice)? If you are, then you have contradicted yourself.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. And it's not a contradiction at all for the reasons above.

You're still not getting the fact that for this god concept, knowledge for god isn't gained linearly over time, but all at once, due to where this god "lives" (tx) and its ability to see all past times at the same time.

We're trapped into forming knowledge linearly (t1 to t2 to t3 etc.).

This distinction is why your argument doesn't work.

 

[4x4toy]

If my grandson is given the free will choice whether to play with a toy gun or a dollbaby , it will be the toy gun ... I know my grandson , at 3 he asked Santa for a switchblade ..

Like I said in another post "God knows Fred" ,but infinitely more than I know my grandson .. So Fred has free will in all he does and by God knowing Fred , also his choices .. God can also lead Fred in a direction through setting up options according to Fred's free will knowing Fred and his freewill choice before he makes it , then the choice good or bad is integrated into Tom , Sam and John's freewill choices .. So ultimately Fred has free will and either ask God's guidance or ignores God's potential guidance in the matter..

 

[Albion]

If my grandson is given the free will choice whether to play with a toy gun or a dollbaby , it will be the toy gun ... I know my grandson , at 3 he asked Santa for a switchblade ..

Like I said in another post "God knows Fred" ,but infinitely more than I know my grandson .. So Fred has free will in all he does and by God knowing Fred , also his choices .. God can also lead Fred in a direction through setting up options according to Fred's free will knowing Fred and his freewill choice before he makes it , then the choice good or bad is integrated into Tom , Sam and John's freewill choices .. So ultimately Fred has free will and either ask God's guidance or ignores God's potential guidance in the matter..

Except that the Bible says those whom God did foreknow he did predestine, not set up "options according to Fred's free will knowing Fred and his freewill choice...." etc. etc.

 

[talquin]

When I say has a truth value, I don't mean from a subjective POV. I mean objectively. At any given point in time, variable X is one of the three: equal to A; equal to B or has no value - regardless of whose perspective it is.

I'm not saying it's subjective. Objectively, this god knows that Fred freely chose (Pay attention to the language I'm using. I didn't say "will choose") at t2 and all other points on the timeline (t0 to tx), since god lives at tx, and everything is the past. Fred only can objectively confirm his choice after t2 because he experiences time lineraly. There's nothing subjective about it.

If variable X (God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 a/b choice) and variable Y (Fred's day 2 a/b choice) are always in sync, then one cannot have a value while the other one does. So if Fred assigns variable Y a value on day 2, then it would be a lie to say anyone has knowledge of Fred's choice prior to when Fred makes the choice.

I don't mean from Fred's perspective. I mean the objective truth - regardless of what Fred's perspective is. So again: if Fred freely makes his A/B choice on day 2, and variable Y represents Fred's day 2 A/B choice, that variable Y receives its value on day 2. Correct?

For Fred, yes. This god lives at tx (the end of time), which allows it to see all of history as if it's the past.

It sounds like you're suggesting that variable Y (Fred's day 2 a/b choice) receives its value at different points in time, depending on whose perspective it is. Since it is presupposed that variable Y gets its value on day 2, if anyone perceives it to get a value at a different point in time, then they have been deceived.

If Fred is free to choose either A or B, then what happens if variable X is A (or God's knowledge of Fred's choice is A) and Fred freely chooses B?

It's nonsensical to think that a god who can objectively see that Fred has already chosen B chose A instead. So your situation above wouldn't happen.

If you saw a videotape of me eating lunch yesterday, and you know the videotape is accurate, would you say that I ate something other than I did? I wouldn't, because that would be insane...

I'm not talking about someone or something which has already seen Fred make his choice, as Fred doesn't make his choice until day 2. I'm trying to get you to see the logical conflict. If you've already seen Fred choose B, then it means that it must be after the point in time that Fred made his choice. In the question, we're presupposing that variable X (or God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 a/b choice) has a value of A at points in time prior to when Fred makes his day 2 a/b choice)

Or are you contending that variable X (god's knowledge) is a function of variable Y (fred's choice)? If you are, then you have contradicted yourself.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. And it's not a contradiction at all for the reasons above.

If variable X is a function of variable Y, then at points in time when variable Y doesn't have a value, then variable X wouldn't have a value. Variable X and variable Y can't be equal to each other if one has a value while the other doesn't.

You're still not getting the fact that for this god concept, knowledge for god isn't gained linearly over time, but all at once, due to where this god "lives" (tx) and its ability to see all past times at the same time.

How do you know this?

We're trapped into forming knowledge linearly (t1 to t2 to t3 etc.).

Have you ever observed something else? If so, when and where?

 

[4x4toy]

Except that the Bible says those whom God did foreknow he did predestine, not set up "options according to Fred's free will knowing Fred and his freewill choice...." etc. etc.

Sure it is . How else could we qualify for the full reward or severity of punishment other than choosing our options good or bad in obedience .. And God knows us before we were formed .. Jesus was murdered by hate full men and their free will to the max .. If you want me to say Fred is predestined to hell , I will , but it is by his free will and it is his choice, God knowing him has no effect .. God prophesied of Jesus murder 100's of years prior and at the same time Jesus could have called a legion of angels to rescue Himself .. But as believers we are predestined as known sons of God and we are tested and tried by free will choices .. Through it all God remains blameless and faithful to us and to His enemies .. He is God you know

 

[Albion]

Sure it is . How else could we qualify for the full reward or severity of punishment other than choosing our options good or bad in obedience

Sure it is...what?

I pointed to the Bible's language saying that God foreknows and predestines. That rules out free will, at least so far as choosing God is concerned.

And God knows us before we were formed .. Jesus was murdered by hate full men and their free will to the max .. If you want me to say Fred is predestined to hell , I will

Why would you think I'd want you to say that? Fred is just as likely to be predestined to salvation.

but it is by his free will and it is his choice

Not if he's predestined...and that's what God does, according to that verse.

 

[4x4toy]

Sure it is...what?

I pointed to the Bible's language saying that God foreknows and predestines. That rules out free will, at least so far as choosing God is concerned.



Why would you think I'd want you to say that? Fred is just as likely to be predestined to salvation.


Not if he's predestined...and that's what God does, according to that verse.

And it is not God's will that any perish but all come to repentance .. It's Fred's will in the end , either or , I'm willing to learn and I often shoot from the hip .. But we are to win Fred for Christ and God knows where we fall short too .. God wipes away every tear after 1000 years .. Maybe God knew Fred could have been spared if Tom , Sam or John had done their job .. Thanks for the dialogue , it makes me think

 

[JCFantasy23]

MOD HAT ON

Staff has voted to leave this thread permanently closed.

Please remember this rule of the statement of purpose:

"Threads which staff determines are intended for the sole purpose of attacking or arguing against Christianity will be closed.

General Apologetics threads are not permitted on the forum, arguing against Christianity.


MOD HAT OFF
​