The problem of omniscience

[Kim7229]

Exactly. This is so simple, yet people keep throwing it out there like it's some magic "gotcha." Pretty soon we'll be asked to ponder whether or not God can make a square circle.

Let's say God knows you're going to choose A out of an A/B choice. You then proceed to choose B. What does this do to God's knowledge that you would choose A?

 

[Kim7229]

Let me come at this from a different direction... consider this analogy:

God can be compared to a computer designer who has perfect foreknowledge. He decides to create a new 3D simulation. In this simulation, there are countless tiny points. Through this simulation He sends a solid line, and designs the line to change direction randomly each time it intersects one of the tiny points.

Now, because the Designer has perfect foreknowledge, He knows exactly which direction the line will move each time it hits a point. That is foreknowledge. Yet, that does not change the fact that He specifically designed the lines to change direction randomly. This is free will. Neither is compromised by your dilemma.

Hope this helps;
Michael

In your analogy, does the line have the freedom to choose which way it will go when it hits a point? If no, then it's a false analogy. If yes, then what happens if it choose to go in direction X but the computer designer knew it would go in direction Y?

 

[Kim7229]

Unfortunately, for humans it is a logical fallacy to have freedom of choice in the sphere of omnipotence. In reality, it is completely "logical."

Essentially, human thinking is highly limited, because most all of us only see time in one dimension. If you see time and events in one dimensional flow, and responsibility and choice as a one-dimensional projection of those times and events, then of course it seems like you have no choice. Your entire flow is in one direction; it doesn't matter if you are ignorant or omnipotent.

Time is not linear; we should know this because of prophecy, and magical oracles and visions spoken about in the canonical text alone. Yet, it is hard to train the mind to think of time as non-linear.

Linear time is a luxury: to be able to see the entirety of your life one moment at a time rather than as a path of Brownian Motion. It allows us to see exactly why we will end up where we will end up - [because you are already there]. None of this takes the responsibility from the individual because the individual has/is already making the choices upon his or her own limited will (the will that matters). Your choice is your choice; you may just be aware that it isn't necessarily unique or time-dependent.

Let's say God knows tomorrow you will choose A out of an A/B choice. You then proceed to choose B. What does this do to God's knowledge that you would choose A?

 

[Phil 1:21]

Let's say God knows you're going to choose A out of an A/B choice. You then proceed to choose B. What does this do to God's knowledge that you would choose A?

If God knows you're going to choose A it's because you're going to choose A.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Nope. I'm just showing that it is logically impossible for anyone or anything to have infallible knowledge of yet to be made free choices. Nothing else. For example, let's say you had infallible knowledge that tomorrow I will choose A out of an A/B choice. I then proceed to choose B. That would nullify your knowledge. Very simple stuff.

....as if! You're assuming that your use of the Law of Non-contradiction actually works when applied to ...............................some kind of Being who acts outside as well as inside of our space-time existence. You're own logic can't even fully explain itself, much less the workings and nature of some Being whom we know not which it is.

Besides, there's a debate going on as to whether or not Free Will even exists, and that's without even bringing God into it. So, if we're having a hard time simply identifying whether or not Free Will is real on an existential level, what makes you think you're actually working with a fully defined concept when attempting to shove it into the confines of your Logic Machine?

 

[Phil 1:21]

....as if! You're assuming that your use of the Law of Non-contradiction actually works when applied to ...............................some kind of Being who acts outside as well as inside of our space-time existence. You're own logic can't even fully explain itself, much less the workings and nature of some Being whom we know not which it is.

Besides, there's a debate going on as to whether or not Free Will even exists, and that's without even bringing God into it. So, if we're having a hard time simply identifying whether or not Free Will is real on an existential level, what makes you think you're actually working with a fully defined concept when attempting to shove it into the confines of your Logic Machine?

Exactly!

Isaiah 55:8-9

8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,”
declares the Lord.
9 “As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

 

[Kim7229]

....as if! You're assuming that your use of the Law of Non-contradiction actually works when applied to ...............................some kind of Being who acts outside as well as inside of our space-time existence. You're own logic can't even fully explain itself, much less the workings and nature of some Being whom we know not which it is.

Besides, there's a debate going on as to whether or not Free Will even exists, and that's without even bringing God into it. So, if we're having a hard time simply identifying whether or not Free Will is real on an existential level, what makes you think you're actually working with a fully defined concept when attempting to shove it into the confines of your Logic Machine?

Read the OP. You'll see it doesn't matter if the one with the knowledge is outside of time or not. What matters is when IN OUR TIMELINE the being has the knowledge (e.g. when X has a truth value).

Whether or not free will exists is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the scenario in the OP assumes man has the freedom to make choices (e.g. up until the moment in time Pete chooses A out of an A/B choice, he could still have chosen B). If man doesn't have that type of free will, then we don't have a contradiction.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Read the OP. You'll see it doesn't matter if the one with the knowledge is outside of time or not. What matters is when IN OUR TIMELINE the being has the knowledge (e.g. when X has a truth value).

Whether or not free will exists is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the scenario in the OP assumes man has the freedom to make choices (e.g. up until the moment in time Pete chooses A out of an A/B choice, he could still have chosen B). If man doesn't have that type of free will, then we don't have a contradiction.

Ok. That's a good point. So, if we don't have "that type" of free will, and if this is indeed the case, then what do you think this ultimately means for Christian Theology?

 

[JohnClay]

What if we were talking about the movie "Groundhog Day" - if Phil acts a certain way, the others will ALWAYS act a certain way in response. So they don't have true free will.

 

[food4thought]

If true, then there must be part of the OP presuppositions you don't agree with. Is it that you don't believe that Pete can freely choose A or B? Or is it something else?

I believe that God's omniscience does not preclude man's free will. That is what I was attempting to illustrate with my analogy... of course Pete can freely choose between A or B, but whatever His choice is God knows with infallible foreknowledge.

You are presupposing that an omnipotent, omniscient Being is incapable of doing something you cannot reduce to a logical syllogism. Unfortunately, you are trying to reduce God to our level of thinking, which is a fruitless enterprise. God's thoughts are higher than our thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9).

 

[food4thought]

In your analogy, does the line have the freedom to choose which way it will go when it hits a point? If no, then it's a false analogy.

All analogies fall apart at some point. OK... let's replace our random line with an AI line designed to make choices based upon a desire to reach a certain point. Again, just because the designer knows what choices the line will make does not change the fact that He specifically designed the line to make it's own choices.

If yes, then what happens if it choose to go in direction X but the computer designer knew it would go in direction Y?

Whatever the program designer knows will happen, will happen. He has infallible foreknowledge.

 

[JohnClay]

Kim7229: Do you believe our mind is purely based on our brain activity which is based on chemistry and physics? Assuming deterministic quantum physics our brain processes are deterministic and predictable.

 

[Kim7229]

If God knows you're going to choose A it's because you're going to choose A.

So you wouldn't categorize yourself with the type of person in the OP who says that man has the freedom to choose A or B (meaning that up until the moment in time he chooses A, he still could have chosen B). Interesting.

 

[Kim7229]

Ok. That's a good point. So, if we don't have "that type" of free will, and if this is indeed the case, then what do you think this ultimately means for Christian Theology?

What it means is if we do have that type of free will - it's not an illusion - it means that no god or gods have infallible knowledge of our choices at any point in time prior to when we make our choices. I know many Christians will make the claim that God knows these things in a different time realm. But if one day prior to your choice, it is true that God knows what you will choose, then X would have a truth value one day prior to your choice, meaning that for X and Y to align, you wouldn't have the freedom to choose A or to choose B.

 

[Kim7229]

....as if! You're assuming that your use of the Law of Non-contradiction actually works when applied to ...............................some kind of Being who acts outside as well as inside of our space-time existence. You're own logic can't even fully explain itself, much less the workings and nature of some Being whom we know not which it is.

Besides, there's a debate going on as to whether or not Free Will even exists, and that's without even bringing God into it. So, if we're having a hard time simply identifying whether or not Free Will is real on an existential level, what makes you think you're actually working with a fully defined concept when attempting to shove it into the confines of your Logic Machine?

The OP responds to claims that we do have free will or that up until the point in time that one chooses A, he could have still chosen B (or not A).

 

[Phil 1:21]

Let's say God knows you're going to choose A out of an A/B choice. You then proceed to choose B. What does this do to God's knowledge that you would choose A?

If God knows you're going to choose A it's because you're going to choose A.

So you wouldn't categorize yourself with the type of person in the OP who says that man has the freedom to choose A or B (meaning that up until the moment in time he chooses A, he still could have chosen B). Interesting.

When one gets to the point of having to invent beliefs in others in order to support their position, they've already lost.

 

[Kim7229]

What if we were talking about the movie "Groundhog Day" - if Phil acts a certain way, the others will ALWAYS act a certain way in response. So they don't have true free will.

I suggest you watch Groundhog Day again. The movie did not put any emphasis on that. Where the emphasis was put was on showing the different types of reactions Phil would get by behaving differently. Just look at all the Ned Ryerson scenes here.

 

[Kim7229]

Kim7229: Do you believe our mind is purely based on our brain activity which is based on chemistry and physics? Assuming deterministic quantum physics our brain processes are deterministic and predictable.

I wouldn't go so far to say that's what I do believe. But I have yet to encounter any evidence which would be convincing enough to get me to believe something otherwise.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

What it means is if we do have that type of free will - it's not an illusion - it means that no god or gods have infallible knowledge of our choices at any point in time prior to when we make our choices. I know many Christians will make the claim that God knows these things in a different time realm. But if one day prior to your choice, it is true that God knows what you will choose, then X would have a truth value one day prior to your choice, meaning that for X and Y to align, you wouldn't have the freedom to choose A or to choose B.

So, it sounds to me as if the insinuated and undeclared definition for "free will" in the OP is a permeating state, one that affects the individual on both internal and external levels and one where the individual can, by permeated freedom, make a choice between A or B, correct?

 

[Kaon]

Let's say God knows tomorrow you will choose A out of an A/B choice. You then proceed to choose B. What does this do to God's knowledge that you would choose A?

It was never knowledge then; it was intuition at best, and guessing in general.

Let me give you some perspective. This realm is not hard to model, and for the Most High God It is consequential that it is predictable. This chaos realm we call the known universe is driven by mathematics chaos - a real type of non-psychosocial dynamical system.

The solutions of chaos can be solved for - by humans.

So, the fact that things can be predicted, or that things can be seen to happen before they do is not an indicator of "soul-chains". If anything, we chained ourselves when we broke Universal Law of the Most High God - despite being told of Him.

We humans think of EVERYTHING, but especially time and progress, too linearly.