Yes, but that knowledge in and of itself is the only thing the being possesses, and that knowledge alone is not making it impossible for you to choose box B.
The whole point of the thread is to discuss whether or not the knowledge of an omniscient restricts our options by proxy.
If I may restate what you say;
If the ability for it to happen is there, then I cannot state that it will not happen.
If it is possible to happen, I cannot state that it will not happen.
If you think that this is an unfair representation of what you have said, then say so and ignore the following bit. I'm just shuffling your words a bit while trying to keep the same meaning to make my response easier, and if I failed to keep the meaning straight just say so.
It is an accurate rephrasing, though I am curious as to what you mean by 'ability'.
Now, again, it seems you are confusing can't and won't. Something may have the ability to happen, but no possibility of happening. For instance, the pH of water is 7. That means that 10^-7th of the water molecules are H+ and OH- at any given time. (Another way to think about it is 10^-5 % of them are torn apart at any given point in time.) Now, because which ones are currently torn apart and which are not is random, it is possible that all the water on the planet could separate at the same time (which would, obviously, kill everything on the planet.) It is physically possible for that to happen. But it will not happen.
Why on Earth not? Remember that pH is a statistical average: 1/10^7
an average. I take it you have some chemical background: you must know how water can evapourate at room temperature and pressure.
And this is before we add quantum to the mix!
Basically, all the water in the universe
could go into such a form. There is no reason why it won't, it is perfectly capable of doing so, and thus we cannot say that it won't. We can say that it
probably won't, but that's a rather different statement.
The same occurs with you and your two boxes. At no point is the choice of box B denied to you in any way. There is nothing preventing you from picking it. But you won't.
I disagree: the existance of foreknowledge alters reality.
Remember, you don't know the being knows you will pick box A, you didn't even say in the OP that you knew of a prediction! You would probably wind up dithering for some amount of time wondering which box it picked for you to pick and eventually just pick one, without the being having ever influenced you in any way. There was nothing to stop you from picking the other box, you just didn't pick it, and the being knows that after your dithering you won't pick it, that at any point in time you could have picked it, and you might even have picked it and then decided to actually pick the other one several times, but you could have finalized it as your choice at any time.
I agree with your assesment of the scenario: for all intents and purposes, I am not aware of the omniscients existance.
But the fact remains that the omniscient exists (in the scenario, at least), and it is my belief that it's foreknowledge denies the existance of free will.
Remember, the choice is not fixed until after it happens. The omniscient knows the outcome of the choice because it knows everything about after the choice is made. But up until the choice is made it is not fixed. The being knows what happens after the 'fixing point', but until that point, the choice is still a free one. The fact that the outcome is known does not deny they choice itself.
Of course it does: if it is not fixed, if the possibility of picking box B remains, then the omniscient does not
know what will happen. Conversly, that the omniscient
does know what will happen belies the possibility of picking box B, and implicitly fixes the decision.
Now, I figure I'll put in my own view on omniscience. Ialways figured that omniscience is knowing everything. Which, in this case, would mean knowing all possibilities of the choice of box, and all the dilemmas the choice of each box would lead to, and all the choices to those dilemmas, and the further dilemmas each of those choices would cause, and their possible solutions, and so on. Kind of like a cone from the point in time we are at.
While that would be very, very close to omniscience, it is a hair's breadth away from true omniscience: it doesn't know what option
will be taken at each junction.
If free will truely exists, then this is as close to omniscience as any entity can hope to be. But it is not omniscience, since everything is
not known.
And interesting thought though; I hadn't considered that.
