There is no such thing as 'Free Will'

[Tiberius]

Yeah, but you know that's a nonsense argument.

And pray tell, what part of that is nonsense?

 

[Tiberius]

Actually, it is ... you just won't see it.

You have not been able to show it.

And claiming it is does not prove that it is.

It is the case.

What is not the case, is that God's knowledge infers determinism – this is an open question – active in and discussed by philosophers and theologians – there is no indisputable answer.

This from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
"8: Concluding remarks:
The argument (Logical Determinism) that a proposition’s being true prior to the occurrence of the event it describes logically precludes free will ultimately rests on a modal fallacy.

The argument (Epistemic Determinism) that a proposition’s being known prior to the occurrence of the event it describes logically precludes free will, as in the case of logical determinism, ultimately rests on a modal fallacy... "

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has a discussion on Foreknowledge and Free Will.

So I've provided loads of material supporting my assertion. You have actually provided nothing beyond an argument that sits on a logical fallacy.

It seems quite simple to me.

If God knows the future in exact detail, and is never wrong, then anything that God sees with his future-vision is absolutely guaranteed to occur. It MUST occur in exactly the way God saw it. If there is even the slightest difference, then God was wrong (and God, being the almighty and perfectly omniscient and perfectly omniprescient, can't ever be mistaken or wrong about anything).

So if God sees the in my future, I am going to do a particular thing, then it is completely impossible for me to NOT do that thing. I must--MUST--do that thing in exactly the way God saw me do it. No deviation from God's vision is possible, since any deviation would mean God was wrong, and that is impossible for a perfectly omniscient and perfectly omniprescient God.

God, being perfectly omniscient and perfectly omniprescient would therefore be aware of every single thing I do, down to the smallest action of the most insignificant of my cells. Thus, it must be the case that God knows every single detail about every single instant of my life, and the same for everyone else.

How can we claim to be able to freely choose anything when God knows every detail of our lives like this? If we do even one thing differently, it results in God being wrong, and therefore he is not perfectly omniscient and perfectly omniprescient. And if that's the case, he can't KNOW anything about the future, he's just making an educated guess.

 

[Tiberius]

..but no, you don't want to do that .. you want to show how believers are irrational.

Believing two contradictory positions at the same time sure seems irrational to me...

 

[Thomas]

You have not been able to show it.

I rather think I have ... you won't see it.

And claiming it is does not prove that it is.

Which is why I offered the reasoning.

It seems quite simple to me.

I know, but your thesis rests on false assumption.

Let me walk you through it again:

If God knows the future in exact detail, and is never wrong ...

God's knowledge is not subject to temporal determination. This means there is neither future nor past – all is 'now' is the best way to say it.

So God knows you pick that shirt in the moment you pick it, but as God is not in time, God's knowledge is not conditional, not framed by time, as ours is. God always knows you pick that shirt, the moment of that choiceis eternally present, always now, in God, along with every other moment.

... then anything that God sees with his future-vision is absolutely guaranteed to occur.

God does not suffer temporal conditioning of His vision.

It MUST occur in exactly the way God saw it.

This echoes the above error.

If there is even the slightest difference, then God was wrong (and God, being the almighty and perfectly omniscient and perfectly omniprescient, can't ever be mistaken or wrong about anything).

Error on error.

But this is actually another discussion. Here is the crux of your principle error:

So if God sees the in my future ...

For the sake of argument, OK ...

... I am going to do a particular thing, then it is completely impossible for me to NOT do that thing.

Actually, no, it's not. It is possible for you to do some other thing, it's simply that you didn't. You did this thing.

I must--MUST--do that thing in exactly the way God saw me do it.

If God sees the future as you see it – which He doesn't – but even if He did, that does not mean that God, or anything else, determined that you do that thing. It just means that God sees you do it.

I have twin daughters. Different characters. When they were toddlers, we want for a walk, and while out in a park, they ran off across a broad field. Halfway, they stopped and looked back. "She," I said of one, "will come back. She," of the other, "will run on." Which is just what they did. I knew it, their mum knew it. It was in their character to do it.

Now I know this is a poor comparison, I am not God, but I knew that, failing an unseen act, that's what would happen. The only determining factors at play was their own characters. In the same way, the only factor that determined that you would do that thing is you.

No deviation from God's vision is possible, since any deviation would mean God was wrong, and that is impossible for a perfectly omniscient and perfectly omniprescient God.

Still stuck on this time thing. No deviatiom from God's vision, any more than you choosing to do this thing, and doing something else.

God, being perfectly omniscient and perfectly omniprescient would therefore be aware of every single thing I do, down to the smallest action of the most insignificant of my cells. Thus, it must be the case that God knows every single detail about every single instant of my life, and the same for everyone else.

OK. Not sure that's absolutely necessary, but OK.

How can we claim to be able to freely choose anything when God knows every detail of our lives like this?

Because from this, you have to go on to prove determination. You haven't – you've arrived at the point where your argument should begin, and assumed it's a given. It's not.

God knows what you chose because you chose it. Simple as that.

I could argue that God knows you well enough to know what choices you will make, but then so do people who are close to others know what decisions they will make.

I agree that their's is an informed prognostication, whereas with God its absolute knowing – different thing altogether – but you still have to make the case for determination.

And I did give links to the philosophical discussion of that argument, which you seem to have missed?

If we do even one thing differently, it results in God being wrong ...

But you didn't. And if you did something differently, then that would be God's knowledge.

Here you are offering a conditional argument as proof, when over and over I've suggested that God is not subject to the terms of your argument.

Hence your thesis fails.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Seriously?

I would say so .. look at all the destruction in the region.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..It MUST occur in exactly the way God saw it..

Of course, because as far as G-d is concerned, it has "already happened".
..but we are confined to this space-time continuum, and it seems to us that the future
has "not happened yet".

The above scenario does not take away our agency to make choices .. the main reason
why people instinctively think it does, is because of our perception of time .. that it is
somehow absolute .. which it is not.

How can we claim to be able to freely choose anything when God knows every detail of our lives like this?

Well, you are confused by perception .. you see the past as having happened .. and both you and
G-d are aware of it .. but you consider the future to be a completely different thing .. due to
human perception. For G-d, it's all the same .. both past and future.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would say so .. look at all the destruction in the region.

In 'that' region and not everywhere. Of course, the tremors have been felt elsewhere too.

 

[TheLightWithin]

I would say so .. look at all the destruction in the region.

And long has
Armageddon was supposed to happen in 2012
Armageddon was supposed to happen in 2000
Armageddon was supposed to happen in 1986
It was supposed to happen in 1982 also
It was thought to be underway during WWII
It was supposed to happen in 1844
And there's a long, long list.

What do you mean when you say Armageddon is underway? Precisely?

 

[Aupmanyav]

In 'that' region and not everywhere. Of course, the tremors have been felt elsewhere too.

That seems to be, in a way, a God-forsaken region.

 

[muhammad_isa]

What do you mean when you say Armageddon is underway? Precisely?

I've already said .. mass destruction in the region ( in the middle-east, particularly around Jerusalem ).

 

[QuietPeace]

If, indeed, you believe that there is no free will, then why would you post the argument? We could not possibly agree with you, unless we already did, or were predestined to, in either case it would be a waste of time....
On a similar note, why did nobody bring an umbrella to the "pray for Rain" Rally in Atlanta?

Why would people pray for rain and bring umbrellas to protect themselves from the blessing they'd prayed for?

As to free will, if we accept God has dominion over all creation and is sovereign,then free will is impossible.
While libertarian free choice is a characteristic of human self preservation and support. As in,choosing what to fix for lunch,where to vacation,etc...

However,it is all occurring within the omnipresence of creator.

Proverbs 16:9
The heart of man plans his way, but the LORD establishes his steps.

 

[QuietPeace]

This thread is a perfect example as to why you can discuss religious differences, but you can't argue from differing religious perspectives.

Each always stands on impenetrable ground of belief where logic and facts dont matter.

You include yourself in that assessment of course.

 

[wil]

You include yourself in that assessment of course.

When ego rules of course. When ego can step aside, when parental and societal indoctrination can be held in check and learning and observation are given room to explore...not so much.

In general I admire many devotees of various traditions, I borrow from many.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Deleted.

 

[Tiberius]

I rather think I have ... you won't see it.

Then maybe you need to learn how to communicate more clearly.

Which is why I offered the reasoning.

You gave no reason.

You just said, "It IS the case."

And then you cited support which said it was an open question and there was no indisputable answer.

God's knowledge is not subject to temporal determination. This means there is neither future nor past – all is 'now' is the best way to say it.

How have you measured God to determine this?

So God knows you pick that shirt in the moment you pick it, but as God is not in time, God's knowledge is not conditional, not framed by time, as ours is. God always knows you pick that shirt, the moment of that choiceis eternally present, always now, in God, along with every other moment.

Nevertheless, time must be taken into account because I am affected by it.

God does not suffer temporal conditioning of His vision.

What does this even mean?

This echoes the above error.

You have failed to clearly explain what the error is.

All you've done is show that my interpretation contradicts your interpretation. You have not shown that your interpretation is correct.

Error on error.

But this is actually another discussion.

Avoiding the question.

Here is the crux of your principle error:

For the sake of argument, OK ...


Actually, no, it's not. It is possible for you to do some other thing, it's simply that you didn't. You did this thing.

And there we have it.

What is the difference between "it is impossible to do the thing" and "You can do the thing, it's just 100% guaranteed that you won't"?

If God sees the future as you see it – which He doesn't – but even if He did, that does not mean that God, or anything else, determined that you do that thing. It just means that God sees you do it.

So does he see me do it or doesn't he? You're contradicting yourself?

I have twin daughters. Different characters. When they were toddlers, we want for a walk, and while out in a park, they ran off across a broad field. Halfway, they stopped and looked back. "She," I said of one, "will come back. She," of the other, "will run on." Which is just what they did. I knew it, their mum knew it. It was in their character to do it.

Now I know this is a poor comparison, I am not God, but I knew that, failing an unseen act, that's what would happen. The only determining factors at play was their own characters. In the same way, the only factor that determined that you would do that thing is you.

And did you know 100% for sure that she would? Did you know precisely at what location she would turn? Did you know if she would turn back to the left or the right? Did you know if she would start back with her left foot or her right foot?

No.

All you had was an educated guess based on your knowledge of their personalities.

You didn't have certainty.

Still stuck on this time thing. No deviatiom from God's vision, any more than you choosing to do this thing, and doing something else.

You seem determined to not even try to see where I am coming from. It's like you've decided that you must be right, everyone else is wrong, so you don't even look to see the reasoning behind any viewpoint that disagrees with yours.

OK. Not sure that's absolutely necessary, but OK.

And that's why you don't understand my point. Because you can't see that if God knows what I'm going to do, he must know EVERYTHING that I do.

Because from this, you have to go on to prove determination. You haven't – you've arrived at the point where your argument should begin, and assumed it's a given. It's not.

A bit rich of you to demand I provide proof when you haven't provided any proof for your position.

God knows what you chose because you chose it. Simple as that.

And he can't know that until I have chosen.

I could argue that God knows you well enough to know what choices you will make, but then so do people who are close to others know what decisions they will make.

Please refer back to the story you told about your twin daughters.

And I did give links to the philosophical discussion of that argument, which you seem to have missed?

I saw them.

I don't see how they prove your point though.

But you didn't. And if you did something differently, then that would be God's knowledge.

So God is that guy who always says, "I knew you were going to do that" to everything.

Here you are offering a conditional argument as proof, when over and over I've suggested that God is not subject to the terms of your argument.

Hence your thesis fails.

Okay, let's try this.

In a week and a half (on April 26th), I am going to see a movie in a cinema. Does God currently know what shirt I am going to wear?

Please answer with a YES or a NO. Just one word please.

 

[Tiberius]

Of course, because as far as G-d is concerned, it has "already happened".
..but we are confined to this space-time continuum, and it seems to us that the future
has "not happened yet".

The above scenario does not take away our agency to make choices .. the main reason
why people instinctively think it does, is because of our perception of time .. that it is
somehow absolute .. which it is not.


Well, you are confused by perception .. you see the past as having happened .. and both you and
G-d are aware of it .. but you consider the future to be a completely different thing .. due to
human perception. For G-d, it's all the same .. both past and future.

Yes, it does take away our ability to choose.

If I watch Jurassic Park, I KNOW that the lawyer is going to run and hide in the toilet, even at the beginning of the movie. Can the lawyer choose to do something different? No. He CAN'T choose to do something different. Hence, he has no choice.

 

[muhammad_isa]

What is the difference between "it is impossible to do the thing" and "You can do the thing, it's just 100% guaranteed that you won't"?

The real question is why it's "100% guaranteed that you won't"..

The reason is not that which you say. i.e. that it's impossible to choose any other option.
If you had wanted to choose another option, then you would have .. simple as that!

An agent is free to choose, if they could have done otherwise, if they had wanted to do otherwise.

 

[Thomas]

Then maybe you need to learn how to communicate more clearly.

Or, maybe, as the saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water ..."

You gave no reason.

Seriously?

Let me make it as clear as I can for you ... there are two sides to the argument:

Your position is called incompatibilism, that divine foreknowledge is based on divine fore-ordination, implying that human freedom is illusory and that all events happen necessarily.

My position is called compatibism – that Divine Omniscience allows knowledge of free choices without imposing necessity on them.

I have explained that because all time is present to God as 'now' – all time is present to God all at once – then the idea of 'fore-knowledge' or 'pre-determination' requires God to be within time.

It's not the case God knows what will happen before it happens, but that all happening – to us past, present or future – is in the 'eternal now' of God.

+++

Your position and mine are subjects of philosophical debate, with neither being absolutely conclusive.

The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says that the argument "requires rethinking some of the most fundamental questions in philosophy, especially ones concerning time, truth, and modality."

You just said, "It IS the case."

Yes, that's the compatibilist case. You think the incompatibilist position IS the case.

And then you cited support which said it was an open question and there was no indisputable answer.

Exactly, so your claim, as indisputably so, fails, as does mine ... we're at an impasse!

Nevertheless, time must be taken into account because I am affected by it.

You are, God is not, and it's His view we're talking about.

You seem determined to not even try to see where I am coming from.

No, I do see where you're coming from, I'm just saying that's not necessarily the case. Have you thought of this ...

You have argued incompatibilism, and I have engaged with the argument and offered reasons why I think it's not necessarily so.

You're not engaging with the argument of compatibilism, just rejecting it without any consideration at all.

In a week and a half (on April 26th), I am going to see a movie in a cinema. Does God currently know what shirt I am going to wear?

Please answer with a YES or a NO. Just one word please.

Oh, Lordy ...

YES.