Free Will and an Infallible God

Szechuan · Post by **Szechuan** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:29 pm

Okay, so scientifically speaking we can assume that if you know everything about every particle in the universe, that is to say, you know every minute detail and variable in life's big equation, you will know the exact outcome of all events. Obviously, this is impossible for mortals, but what if there were an Omniscient being, a god?

This god, by its very nature, is infallible. It created the universe, and knows every law of every science that we have not or may never discover.

This god makes man, and gives us free will. We have choice. We are not ruled by fate.

But this god knows everything, so before we are even born it knows what effects life will have on us, which of our genes will express, who we will meet, and every other factor in our short existence. Therefore, this god knows exactly how our lives will pan out.

If this god is infallible, and apparently knows the outcome of our lives, how can it give any of us free will? We would be irrevocably and absolutely sure to follow the path god knows we will follow.

So, even in the case of a compassionate, loving, omniscient creator being, how could free will ever exist?

Marius · Post by **Marius** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:41 pm

An omniscient god may exist, even given those conditions if it is not an omnipotent god. This theoretical god may have created existence, but may not have set every parameter in existence, in which case, this god could know everything that could ever happen, but still not control everything that could ever happen. People could still make choices that disappoint god, which is the essence of our idea of free will. We can call this the Sad God notion, if we like. We are still, perhaps, ruled by fate, but we have free will vis a vis god.

Another way that we can have free will and an omniscient god is probably more in keeping with most religious peoples ideas, and that is that there is a transcendent dimension to human existence that is not subject to genetics or our predictable material and social environment, that nonetheless influences human choices. The way I read the ideas of most religious folks (and the vast majority of less religious folks), they assume axiomatically that there is some spiritual-transcendant quality to human being that, by its character is supernatural, or at least beyond the strict conrol of this existence.

Szechuan · Post by **Szechuan** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:59 pm

To point 1, I submit that God doesn't actually need to control anything for my hypothesis to hold true. God knows what choices you will make. Perhaps the free will is actually its lack of direct involvement in your life, but either way, you are stuck on a path to wherever God knows you're going.

I hate to over-simplify, but it seems like the other thing you're saying is that there could be a mysterious something that accounts for human spontaneity, our ability to choose, am I right?

If so, it would still be a factor in our universe, and is most assuredly related to our physical bodies - scientists have, IIRC, watched brain activity fluctuate as people 'think', even if they do not know where that inner voice comes from. I'd posit that this is at least evidence that the world relates in some physical way with our inner selves.

Buzzed · Post by **Buzzed** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:11 pm

Let me explain it in the simple form.

God allows us to make our own choices and God also knows what choices we will make.

Szechuan · Post by **Szechuan** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:24 pm

That's what I said. And therefore we are destined to follow the path set out for us; the path God knows we will follow.
Any other ideas? Is there a reason this doesn't hold logically?

lordhellion · Post by **lordhellion** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:10 pm

A truly omnipotent God, one that has the ability and power to create the universe, all its matter and energy, and to create a soul or mind to inhabit being made of matter and/or energy, would be nearly without limit. I take it for this hypothesis that we are assuming that God indeed has no limits. Therefore, a God without limits may decree that he himself has no precognition of the actions an individual will take.

It's like having a fridge full of beer and just deciding not to take one out. It's His decision.

Not being able to grasp the psyche of such a being, it is rather impossible to decide whether He would choose to bare knowledge of Man's Fate or not, but in the end it's His choice.

TheScamp · Post by **TheScamp** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:33 pm

And therefore we are destined to follow the path set out for us; the path God knows we will follow.

I fail to see how knowing someone's path = creating that path for them.

Szechuan · Post by **Szechuan** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:40 pm

It's difficult to explain. It's like no matter how hard you try, you'll still go straight to hell. If God knows exactly what you are going to do, and cannot be wrong, then you're going to be stuck doing it.

Marius · Post by **Marius** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:16 pm

A truly omnipotent God, one that has the ability and power to create the universe, all its matter and energy, and to create a soul or mind to inhabit being made of matter and/or energy, would be nearly without limit. I take it for this hypothesis that we are assuming that God indeed has no limits.

Eh, I don't take it that way. He said omniscient, but not omnipotent.

Not being able to grasp the psyche of such a being, it is rather impossible to decide whether He would choose to bare knowledge of Man's Fate or not, but in the end it's His choice.

Booooooring.

To point 1, I submit that God doesn't actually need to control anything for my hypothesis to hold true. God knows what choices you will make. Perhaps the free will is actually its lack of direct involvement in your life, but either way, you are stuck on a path to wherever God knows you're going.

But does it matter if God knows where you're going? The question isn't whether you have a freedom to act of your own accord in the strictest sense. When you postulated a deterministic universe, you made that all moot. The question, then, is whether there is free will as an emergent property of human psyche, or in a spiritual sense, whether there is free will vis a vis god. It rather doesn't matter whether god knows what you as an organism are going to do. It doesn't matter if he's going to damn you to hell for doing them, even if you didn't - in a strict, particle physics sense - have a "choice." On an organismal level you had lots of choices, and if the god acted with less than total omnipotence, and didn't set the parameters of reality that eventually led to your choices, then you had a sort of free will.

If God knows exactly what you are going to do, and cannot be wrong, then you're going to be stuck doing it.

When I plant bulbs in my garden, I know some aren't going to grow, and they're going to end up in the trash. It disappoints me. I'm a Sad God. Yeah, so you can say you're stuck doing it. God doesn't have to be happy about it, and he doesn't have to save you for it, even if he loves you.

If so, it would still be a factor in our universe, and is most assuredly related to our physical bodies - scientists have, IIRC, watched brain activity fluctuate as people 'think', even if they do not know where that inner voice comes from. I'd posit that this is at least evidence that the world relates in some physical way with our inner selves.

No, that's the exact opposite of transcendance. A transcendant element to human existence - which most people claim to believe in - would not be part of our universe or observable in our physical bodies.

crone · Post by **crone** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:17 pm

If the universe works the way you said it does, we don't have free will. Adding an observer God doesn't change anything. Your path is fixed, whether God knows what you are going to do or not.

Marius · Post by **Marius** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:36 pm

If the universe works the way you said it does, we don't have free will. Adding an observer God doesn't change anything.

Sure we do. We still have a will. We still choose to move our arms and legs and walk around. Our wills are entirely in and of ourselves. What we don't have control of are the determinants of the selves that give rise to the wills. But there's never been an idea of free will (except, perhaps certain transcendant notions) that claims that the person has control over the entire animated composition of their person.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:47 pm

Szech, you still haven't explained how God knowing what you're going to do eliminates free will.

I would argue the problem is you are assuming that God exists through time in a Linear fashion, similar to ourselves. I say this is a falacy, and that God "lives" outside of time. God knows you're going to do something because he's already watched you do it, not because he knew you were going to do it before you did it (if you follow that).

TheScamp · Post by **TheScamp** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:48 pm

If God knows exactly what you are going to do, and cannot be wrong, then you're going to be stuck doing it.

Or it's equally likely that there is no one set path, no automatically fixed set of choices. God, being the omnipotent being that God is, is just able to see, keep track of, and predict the consequences of all the possibilities that might arise from the choices you make; kind of like a "choose your own adventure" book that God's already memorized.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:21 pm

Of course, in the end, it all comes down to Faith anyways.

crone · Post by **crone** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:10 am

Marius wrote:
If the universe works the way you said it does, we don't have free will. Adding an observer God doesn't change anything.
Sure we do. We still have a will. We still choose to move our arms and legs and walk around. Our wills are entirely in and of ourselves. What we don't have control of are the determinants of the selves that give rise to the wills. But there's never been an idea of free will (except, perhaps certain transcendant notions) that claims that the person has control over the entire animated composition of their person.

We would still have a will, but not free will. Maybe the illusion of it.

Take the personhood out of it. A body senses things, neurons fire, the body moves as directed ( I don't know much about the details of this process, but that's beside the point). If the specifics are determined by genetics, environment, what has gone before, the way Szechuan is suggesting, then any kind of personality that sits on top of that going "I'm choosing to move out of the hot sun" is irrelevant to what happens. It's just another phenomenon arising because the electrons in a certain place are bouncing in a certain way.

You could say that everything that happens in that body goes in to making up that person. So it is 'their' decision, and 'their' will. But that doesn't mean they are in control of it, any more than they are in control of a number of things going on in that body/brain combination.

Marius · Post by **Marius** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:45 am

Take the personhood out of it. A body senses things, neurons fire, the body moves as directed . . .

No, we absolutely will not take the personhood out of it. You can't decide to ignore the entity which is capable of will, and then say, "Look, no will." That's ridiculous and circular.

You can't say, "See there's no will in the mechanics of the hand, and no will in the spasm of the gut, and no will in the firing of the neurons, so this creature can't have will." We do have will. We know we do, because each one of us experiences it. You willed yourself to type your response. The question you're asking is whether this will can, err . . . motivate itself. We will actions based on decisions, which we make based on whatever neurology you decide leads to decision making, including ideas of wants and models of reality, or whatever. The fact that our decisions are predictable based on who or what we are is totally unremarkable. It's not, "Wow, an epiphany! We don't have free will vis a vis ourselves." Of course we don't. That's never what free will was supposed to mean.

You could say that everything that happens in that body goes in to making up that person. So it is 'their' decision, and 'their' will. But that doesn't mean they are in control of it.

Well, yes, that's exactly what it means. They are in control of their will. They are not, however, self-inventing, which is what you seem to want "free will" to mean.

Buzzed · Post by **Buzzed** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:50 am

Let's say a human has the ability to see the future. If that human knows what you will do, does that mean he created the path that you will take? No. You created the path that you will take with your own decisions, that is what free will is all about. Just because God or someone else knows what you will do doesn't mean they created your destiny.

We chose our own destinies. What will I say to God to defend myself before he sends me to Hell? "But that's not fair, you made me vote for Bush!"

Szechuan · Post by **Szechuan** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:27 am

Marius wrote: But does it matter if God knows where you're going?

I don't believe so, because we'll all find out too late to change anything. I'm just wondering if a world where someone knows everything you're going to do can be considered a world of choice, or if it would be better called deterministic. Just random musing, really. I cut the rest because I don't really have anything useful to say to it except 'good points'.

When I plant bulbs in my garden, I know some aren't going to grow, and they're going to end up in the trash. It disappoints me. I'm a Sad God. Yeah, so you can say you're stuck doing it. God doesn't have to be happy about it, and he doesn't have to save you for it, even if he loves you.

So God made a universe in which some of us are damned from the get-go because he decided that some of us simply don't function right? What an asshole.

Marius wrote:
Me wrote:If so, it would still be a factor in our universe, and is most assuredly related to our physical bodies - scientists have, IIRC, watched brain activity fluctuate as people 'think', even if they do not know where that inner voice comes from. I'd posit that this is at least evidence that the world relates in some physical way with our inner selves.
No, that's the exact opposite of transcendance. A transcendant element to human existence - which most people claim to believe in - would not be part of our universe or observable in our physical bodies.

I failed to explain myself correctly. God would still have given us this transcendent quality and, being onmniscient, would know how it works. There. Much better.

MooCow wrote:I would argue the problem is you are assuming that God exists through time in a Linear fashion, similar to ourselves. I say this is a falacy, and that God "lives" outside of time. God knows you're going to do something because he's already watched you do it, not because he knew you were going to do it before you did it (if you follow that).

I was not specifically assuming God exists in a linear fashion, but I do think you have a very good point there. It depends on your perception of God.

TheScamp wrote:Or it's equally likely that there is no one set path, no automatically fixed set of choices. God, being the omnipotent being that God is, is just able to see, keep track of, and predict the consequences of all the possibilities that might arise from the choices you make; kind of like a "choose your own adventure" book that God's already memorized.

I'm not saying there is a fixed path. But if God knows from the get-go where you're going to end up - what pages you flip to, to use your analogy - then is it really free will when we're created with the knowledge that we will read the book a certain way?

crone · Post by **crone** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:18 am

Marius wrote:The fact that our decisions are predictable based on who or what we are is totally unremarkable. It's not, "Wow, an epiphany! We don't have free will vis a vis ourselves." Of course we don't. That's never what free will was supposed to mean.

I don't understand. What do we have free will in regard to?

If the Big Bang created matter and set all the matter particles in motion, then they bounce around the universe for a while, in ways completely predictable by an all-knowing science (or God), settle on Earth, combine and recombine in endlessly complex but pre-determined ways until they end up in Buzzed's brain, and hand, recording a vote for Bush, how does he choose what he thinks, or decides? I think there is the possibility that he does, but only because I don't agree with Szechuan's model of the universe.

And we don't experience free will. That's just a label. We have experience sensations in our bodies, and thoughts in our minds. We can call some of them free will, or divine inspiration, or whatever, doesn't mean that's what it is.

[Slight diversion]Have you ever had the experience of 'willing' your body to do something and it just didn't? "Get out of bed" or "Put down that cigarette". And it doesn't. I think most of the time people are on such terms with themselves that they are 'deciding' to do what they were going to do anyway but every now and then there's a glitch like that. Sometimes the other thing happens too, where a decision is made with such clarity and finality that the rest of the self instantly adapts (Some people give up smoking like that). When it happens it's a very different feeling to your average "I think I'll have vanilla this time." It's not something I can do on demand either. This is all just to say that I don't think 'will' is as straightforward as you are making it seem.

TheScamp · Post by **TheScamp** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:33 am

I'm not saying there is a fixed path. But if God knows from the get-go where you're going to end up - what pages you flip to, to use your analogy - then is it really free will when we're created with the knowledge that we will read the book a certain way?

My point is that it's possible that God doesn't know exactly where we'll end up. God knows all of the possibilities, but until we've made a certain decision, there's still all those paths for us to choose from. All of the possible ends spurring from that decision might be known, but we still get to choose whether we'll go into the haunted woods, or eat the magic apple that we found in the basket first.

Sowhat · Post by **Sowhat** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 7:58 am

Marius wrote:When I plant bulbs in my garden, I know some aren't going to grow, and they're going to end up in the trash. It disappoints me. I'm a Sad God. Yeah, so you can say you're stuck doing it. God doesn't have to be happy about it, and he doesn't have to save you for it, even if he loves you.

But you wouldn't plant them if you knew that they wouldn't grow, in this example you're relying on the fact that you didn't know which were going to grow and which weren't. You planted a few because of chance. With God there is no chance. He knows which ones will grow and which wont. So why should he plant the ones that wont? Dissapointment relies on you not realising what the result will be.

If so, it would still be a factor in our universe, and is most assuredly related to our physical bodies - scientists have, IIRC, watched brain activity fluctuate as people 'think', even if they do not know where that inner voice comes from. I'd posit that this is at least evidence that the world relates in some physical way with our inner selves.
No, that's the exact opposite of transcendance. A transcendant element to human existence - which most people claim to believe in - would not be part of our universe or observable in our physical bodies.

There is only one universe, hence the "uni" prefix. "The universe" is our label for everything. If God created the universe, he therefore created everything, including whatever transcendant element of human behaviour you're talking about.

crone wrote:If the universe works the way you said it does, we don't have free will. Adding an observer God doesn't change anything. Your path is fixed, whether God knows what you are going to do or not.

This is true. I wouldn't say we don't have free will though. Although our actions are predetermined by chemicals, we are those chemicals, therefore it's still us choosing. It just happens that the choices we will make are already pre-determined. Due to this I think it's fair enough that God could judge us on the decisions that we make, except for that (given that he's infallable and can do whatever he pleases) he should never have made people who were destined to go to Hell. Unless of course he's sadistic, which is true of the old testement but not so much of the new.

Moo wrote:Szech, you still haven't explained how God knowing what you're going to do eliminates free will.

I would argue the problem is you are assuming that God exists through time in a Linear fashion, similar to ourselves. I say this is a falacy, and that God "lives" outside of time. God knows you're going to do something because he's already watched you do it, not because he knew you were going to do it before you did it (if you follow that).

Our paths are predetermined, regardless of the presence or absense of a god. But if there is no god, no one forced our paths on us, it simply happened. If there is a god, then as he created everything, he forced our paths apon us. God could watch what would happen to everyone before it's happened and therefore know everything about their lives, however this isn't the only reason he knows everything. Just from knowing what he created when he created it (the energy, direction and type of every particle he created at t = 0), he could then know exactly how they'd interact with each other to result in everything that exists and will exist, and everything that has happened and will ever happen. He may very well be able to watch our lives in fast forward, but he doesn't need to. Therefore he chose our paths from t=0. He's infallable, so if he made us in this way, then this is exactly as he wanted us. Therefore if we commit a sin, it was because he wanted us to. Sure, we decided to do it, it was our choice, but he ALSO chose this path for us, and did so a long time before we were born.

Buzzed wrote:Let's say a human has the ability to see the future. If that human knows what you will do, does that mean he created the path that you will take? No. You created the path that you will take with your own decisions, that is what free will is all about. Just because God or someone else knows what you will do doesn't mean they created your destiny.

The difference is that God created our destinites (he created everything), not just saw them. Therefore he's responsible.

scamp wrote:My point is that it's possible that God doesn't know exactly where we'll end up. God knows all of the possibilities, but until we've made a certain decision, there's still all those paths for us to choose from. All of the possible ends spurring from that decision might be known, but we still get to choose whether we'll go into the haunted woods, or eat the magic apple that we found in the basket first.

There is only one possibility. If we knew every single particle and it's energy, direction and type at any moment, we could predict exactly what would happen in that situation. Humans are chemicals/energy. There are a lot of chemical reactions going on inside us, so many that the illusion of our actions being random is created. But they're not random. Every time we do something it's due to the chemicals and energy in us and in our surroundings. It's too complex for us to consider every single variable in our body and surroundings and come up with a neat little equation of how they'll interact and thusly what actions we'll take, but if we could write a computer program and put in every single variable then the same thing would happen on there as in real life.

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 8:19 am

SoWhat wrote:There is only one universe, hence the "uni" prefix.

Are you sure?

I am no bible beater by any means, nor do I believe in any religion, organized or not, but this seems a bit presumptive.

Our labels often are conveinant for us.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 9:49 am

Just from knowing what he created when he created it (the energy, direction and type of every particle he created at t = 0), he could then know exactly how they'd interact with each other to result in everything that exists and will exist, and everything that has happened and will ever happen.

Not neccesarily. Omnicient means knowning everything, which doesn't neccesarily mean he can see into the future. God knew everything at creation that there was to know, but as time moves forward he learns more. (The idea isn't new, and dove tails with similar concepts like the Universal Mind).

So why should he plant the ones that wont?

Because Evil must exist in order for Good to triumph.

WillyGilligan · Post by **WillyGilligan** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 10:12 am

But Evil will always win, because Good is dumb.

TLM · Post by **TLM** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 10:16 am

Wether we have free will or not is completely irrelevant, or it is to me.

If everything is deterministic, then there is absolutely nothing we can do to change the way things are going to go. We might have the illusion of free will, but we're really just following the script. Stop worrying about it, becuase there is NOTHING we can do to change that.

If we have free will, then we can make meaningful choices that will influence the future in completely unpredictable ways. There is no script and everything that happens is new, vibrant and exciting. Stop worrying about things being deterministic and start dealing with life.

So... Either we can't do a fucking thing without god knowing about it, OR we surprise god by every little thing we do ("Wooow! Marius just scrathced his hand! I had NO idea he'd do that! Awesome! I wonder what he'll do next...?"). Does it change our situation, or our experience and impression of the world? Not one jot.

Wether we have free will or not, we at least have an illusion of it... or I do. So what does it matter if we have it or don't? If we believe we have free will, isn't that enough?

Sowhat · Post by **Sowhat** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 10:21 am

Serious Paul wrote:Are you sure?

I am no bible beater by any means, nor do I believe in any religion, organized or not, but this seems a bit presumptive.

Our labels often are conveinant for us.

Well yes, "the universe" is what we've labeled everything.

Moo wrote:Not neccesarily. Omnicient means knowning everything, which doesn't neccesarily mean he can see into the future. God knew everything at creation that there was to know , but as time moves forward he learns more.

I'm not suggesting that being all-knowing allows you to see into the future, but if he knew everything at any single point in time then he'd also know how everything would interact and therefore where every particle/wave would be at any other time. If you're given the energy, direction and type of everything at any time, the future at any moment in time can be derived from that information (if you're smart enough to account for every variable).

Because Evil must exist in order for Good to triumph.

That's not true at all. It would have been completely possible for him to create a world of happy people who never sinned. How would it not have been? Why does your theory hold?

Szechuan · Post by **Szechuan** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 10:23 am

MooCow wrote:
So why should he plant the ones that wont?
Because Evil must exist in order for Good to triumph.

If they were planted to serve an essential function, why punish them?

crone · Post by **crone** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:17 am

TLM wrote:"Wooow! Marius just scrathced his hand! I had NO idea he'd do that! Awesome! I wonder what he'll do next...?"

The son of a friend of mine asked her why would God give us free will. She said: "If you were God, which do you think would be more interesting?"

Subversive Agent · Post by **Subversive Agent** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:34 am

WillyGilligan wrote:But Evil will always win, because Good is dumb.

Spaceballs quotes will only get you a jelly donut. *Hands over a jelly donut*

Subversive Agent · Post by **Subversive Agent** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:43 am

Here's another interesting assumption : God exists outside space and time (or is stretched over all time and space). Therefore, he knows everything everyone's ever done, without interfering with anyone's free will. Much like any of us reading a newspaper from 1945 for example, where the free will of individuals and the actions taken by that free will are now well know and imutable.

Unless you have a time machine, that is.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:13 pm

MooCow wrote:Szech, you still haven't explained how God knowing what you're going to do eliminates free will.

Pick a book you've never read. There are characters in that book. The author knows what they'll do. Everyone who has ever read it knows what they'll do. It's written down, it can't change. Do those characters have free will?

You have a table set up at an angle. There are barriers along the surface of the table. When you drop a ball, it will roll down and off of those barriers. Even though there are an infinite number of directions the ball could go, in a theory without any solid laws of physics, it will always follow the same path (leaving chaos theory out of it). Does that ball have free will?

God wrote a book. You're a character in it. In this book, you walk through a maze. There are lots of passages, but when someone reads the book, you always take the same route. There's no variation, there cannot be any variation. Do you have free will?

The cloud moveth, the Lord knoweth, the cloud knoweth not. The artist painteth, the Lord knoweth, knoweth the artist not?

All that said... This is a huge thing in philosophy of mind. What you usually end up with is one of several common theories. First choice is dualism or monism. In dualism, there are two substances - Material stuff and Soul stuff, more or less, and a relation between the two. Full interaction, one-way, there's even a version with no interaction at all (mostly for completeness sake). With monism you choose one of those two substances, and that's all there is.

If you go with dualism, you're left with a small problem if you want to keep Free Will in the picture... How can Soul Stuff cause anythign to happen in the Material world? If it has an effect on the material world, you b0rk physical causality. Physical events happen without physical causes. If it doesn't have an effect on the material world, how do you make choices?

If you go with materialism, you end up with even worse propositions for retaining free will... Either you have perfect causality, in which case everything is determined, or you don't, in which case some events are effectively random and there is no causality. If you go with idealism (only Mental / Soul stuff) you can keep free will, but you completely lose physics because there is no physical matter.

So... above we're dealing with some sort of deterministic material view of things... this leads to Sad God or Asshole God (depending on how you want to view it)... Sad God knows what will happen before he does it. The book is written, he wrote it, but he reads it again anyways even though he already knows the outcome and no "real" choices ever occur (more analogies! Ever played a game where whenever you tried to do something else the game said something like "nope, you can't go that way, now back to the script," - that's your life. You're following a script, not making choices or really playing a game).

If you want to include Free Will, you'll need to ditch Omniscient, which inherently eliminates Omnipotence -- even if he has the power to do anything, with the knowledge to wield it correctly there are some things he can't do -- and eventually end up with Fallible God. Fallible God doesn't know what's going to happen. Therefore, he doesnt know what effects his actions will have, and he could make a mistake. It might be incredibly unlikely, but it is a logical possibility.

The only remaining option seems to be pure Faith. There is something wholly beyond human understanding at work. You are not capable of understanding it, you must simply believe or disbelieve. Technically there is the option of it being some element we can understand but simply haven't yet discovered, but given the nature of the problem, there doesn't seem to be a lot of wiggle room in the logical end of things.

WillyGilligan · Post by **WillyGilligan** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:22 pm

Well yes, "the universe" is what we've labeled everything.

It's what we labeled "everything" at one time, but is that how it's used now? Quantum theory (which I'm barely literate on, so feel free to correct me) brought forth the idea (proven or no) that for anything that happens, every possible path it could have taken also happened (at least on the quantum level). If that is the case, what do we call this time and space where sequence x happened versus sequence y? What do we call the time/space where y happened instead, or the sum collection of all the sequences?

By your reasoning above, plus this:

There is only one universe, hence the "uni" prefix.

I could say that subatomic particles don't exist because "atom" meant indestructible. Using the understanding of the time, they thought that the atom was as small as matter got and named it thusly. Our understanding has changed, so our usage of the word changed, rather than the more elegant idea of changing the name of the thing to something more realistic.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:43 pm

If you're given the energy, direction and type of everything at any time, the future at any moment in time can be derived from that information (if you're smart enough to account for every variable).

Smart has nothing to with it. If the knowledge required to make those calculations didn't exist, then you couldn't make them. Perhaps God created us in order to further his own knowledge?

It would have been completely possible for him to create a world of happy people

Sure, but what does that have to do with what I said? You assume the reason for our creation was soley so that we could be "happy". There are higher pursuits then "happiness".

Pick a book you've never read. There are characters in that book. The author knows what they'll do. Everyone who has ever read it knows what they'll do. It's written down, it can't change. Do those characters have free will?

Yes. My knowing what decisions they will make doesn't change the fact that they chose to make those decisions. I have no relation to those characters.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:44 pm

If they were planted to serve an essential function, why punish them?

Because they chose to do evil, and evil must be punished.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:51 pm

TLM wrote:Wether we have free will or not is completely irrelevant, or it is to me.
...
Wether we have free will or not, we at least have an illusion of it... or I do. So what does it matter if we have it or don't? If we believe we have free will, isn't that enough?

That's "Whether". And this is probably the most sane way to live your life in the end, but I think you should just know that you were pre-determined to come up with this philosophy...

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:58 pm

In that case, I'd don't feel bad about humping your ear. *MooCow proceeds to do just that*

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:01 pm

MooCow wrote:
Pick a book you've never read. There are characters in that book. The author knows what they'll do. Everyone who has ever read it knows what they'll do. It's written down, it can't change. Do those characters have free will?
Yes. My knowing what decisions they will make doesn't change the fact that they chose to make those decisions. I have no relation to those characters.

What decisions? They never make a single choice. There are no other options. Here, take my poll:

Instructions: Choose only from the lettered answers following the question.

1) Do you have any choices in this poll?
a) No

Following the instructions, there aren't any choices in that poll. There is no alternative route. Even if I put in a second option, like so...

1) Do you have any choices in this poll?
a) No.
b) No.

...there still aren't any choices. There appear to be choices, but they are illusory. Why do people hate it when the GM railroads their characters in an RPG? Because there is no choice. Sure, you can kinda say, "My character goes to do this," but your character doesn't actually get to do it unless it's part of the GM's script. You're an actor in a play, your part has been written, there are no choices to be made. You are a pure automaton following a set path. This is implied by God having created a clock-work universe and knowing every action you have taken or will take. How, then, can you have free will?

Edit:

MooCow wrote:In that case, I'd don't feel bad about humping your ear. *MooCow proceeds to do just that*

That argument has been made and is quite valid... if you believe in determinism, then there is no justice in punishment, and no real guilt in any act. Of course, I was predetermined to rip your testicles off after you humped my ear, and I feel no remorse that this must happen as I have no control over it... *Anguirel proceeds to do just that*

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:05 pm

What decisions? They never make a single choice.

Of course they do. Why do you think they don't?

3278 · Post by **3278** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:09 pm

Regarding "the universe:" Universe no longer means "everything," since our notion of "everything" has expanded quite a bit since we started using the term. Universe now means the space/time in which we live. That space/time may be imbedded in something else, and in fact it seems fairly likely; we refer to this totality of everything as the "omniverse." There may be many more than one universe within the omniverse.

Another, informal but well-accepted term for the omniverse is "Cosmos," a word even older than universe; it is meant to indicate not only all that is, was, or ever shall be, but also the systemic rules according to which they operate. In a way, cosmos is the opposite of chaos.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:09 pm

Mark walked into the kitchen, and opened up the fridge. "Hey john, you want a hot dog?" he called out. "Sure, sounds good. Give me mustard and pickles on it." John said. "Coming right up." Mark called back.

There are numerous decisions there. Mark decided to go into the kitchen, he decided to open the fridge, he decided to ask John if he wanted anything (which he didn't have to do), John decided to have a hot dog, etc etc.

All examples of free choice. The fact that I knew they were going to make those choices is irrelevent.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:14 pm

MooCow wrote:
What decisions? They never make a single choice.
Of course they do. Why do you think they don't?

Mainly because they don't exist...

They are no more capable of making decisions than, say, a pendulum is capable of deciding to not swing along a fixed path once set in motion without any outside influences. Even were they real beings inside this theoretical universe that Szechuan has delineated, they would be following precise scripts. Does a ball have any choice about where it goes? Does a bridge have any choice about holding up a truck? Does a road have any choice about its destination? "You thought you were driving to Santa Fe, and yesterday I would have brought you there, but I decided I want to lead to Montreal today... sorry." Within the context of this theoretical universe, you have as much capability of free will as any other physical object. Mud would have as much free will as you would. A single grain of sand would be capable of making decisions, and would effect those decisions just as well.

In this universe, you are completely defined by physical laws. Your decision making process of whether to have blueberry or strawberry jam is an equation as much as gravity is an equation. There is no choice in whether something is effected by gravity, and there is no choice in whether you end up with blueberry or strawberry jam.

And if you choose to type a one sentence response to make me type another volume, I'm going to choose to ignore you.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:17 pm

MooCow wrote:Mark walked into the kitchen, and opened up the fridge. "Hey john, you want a hot dog?" he called out. "Sure, sounds good. Give me mustard and pickles on it." John said. "Coming right up." Mark called back.

There are numerous decisions there. Mark decided to go into the kitchen, he decided to open the fridge, he decided to ask John if he wanted anything (which he didn't have to do), John decided to have a hot dog, etc etc.

All examples of free choice. The fact that I knew they were going to make those choices is irrelevent.

No choices happen at all. Mark didn't decide. There's no alternative. The only way for Mark to not go to the kitchen for a given reader is if the reader stops reading, and that is the reader's choice, not Mark's.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:26 pm

The only way for Mark to not go to the kitchen for a given reader is if the reader stops reading

Uhhh.... what does that have to do with Mark? Mark will still go to the kitchen. Or maybe he won't. All that happens if the reader stops reading is they don't know. Mark still makes his decision.

Even were they real beings inside this theoretical universe that Szechuan has delineated, they would be following precise scripts

No, he specifically said that wasn't the case.

Szech wrote:We are not ruled by fate.

That right there means we are capable of breaking away from the script. No matter what has come before, we /can/ choose to not be influenced by it.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:28 pm

Your argument that knowledge = control is false. God /knows/ what we will do, but he does not /control/ what we do. There is a difference.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:44 pm

MooCow wrote:
The only way for Mark to not go to the kitchen for a given reader is if the reader stops reading
Uhhh.... what does that have to do with Mark? Mark will still go to the kitchen. Or maybe he won't. All that happens if the reader stops reading is they don't know. Mark still makes his decision.

Only Mark doesn't exist.

Even were they real beings inside this theoretical universe that Szechuan has delineated, they would be following precise scripts
No, he specifically said that wasn't the case.

Szech wrote:We are not ruled by fate.
That right there means we are capable of breaking away from the script. No matter what has come before, we /can/ choose to not be influenced by it.

He's attempting to create a paradox. A contradiction between God creating us with Free Will, and the impossibility of an omniscient being creating anythign with Free Will. And that revolves around your next post...

MooCow wrote:Your argument that knowledge = control is false. God /knows/ what we will do, but he does not /control/ what we do. There is a difference.

There is a difference. In this you are correct. I can know what you will do, but that wouldn't alter your decision to do it, because I have no causal relation to you. However, that same lack of causal relation cannot apply to God. By definition, God created you and set you in motion. You are the equivalent to a wind-up toy for God.

Let me break the distinction, with regards to god, for you. Flawlessly design a simple robot. Flawlessly build it. Flawlessly script out a series of commands for it - let's say 2 meters straight, turn 90 degrees right and two meters straight, 90 degrees right, 2 meters straight. Flawlessly create an appropriate world for it within which it can execute and completely perform that script. When you activate that robot, it will not make any choices. You will know exactly where it will go because you designed, built and programmed it. It cannot possibly end up anywhere other than 2 meters to the right of its starting location and facing in the reverse direction. Other "options" appear to exist. It "could" reverse course or turn left or whatever else... but really it can't. It's locked into a script.

To an outside observer, the robot may appear to be making decisions, but no decision making is happening at all. Just the same, if God knew what you were going to do before you were created (and, in fact, before the Universe itself was created) then you are not making decisions. You are following a script, one which includes self-referential commands, like "ponder X" or "think you are making choice Y".

If you are willing to say that robot has Free Will, then yes, within your mind set you have Free Will, for whatever it is worth. In my case, I'm not willing to call that sort of thing "Free Will".

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:51 pm

Flawlessly design a simple robot. Flawlessly build it. Flawlessly script out a series of commands for it - let's say 2 meters straight, turn 90 degrees right and two meters straight, 90 degrees right, 2 meters straight. Flawlessly create an appropriate world for it within which it can execute and completely perform that script

Except God did none of those things. Except maybe the design and build part. Everything else was made with flaws.

Flawlessly script out a series of commands for it

God didn't do this.

if God knew what you were going to do before you were created (and, in fact, before the Universe itself was created) then you are not making decisions

Yes I am. Knowledge does not equal control.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:52 pm

He's attempting to create a paradox

He failed.

TheScamp · Post by **TheScamp** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:06 pm

If we knew every single particle and it's energy, direction and type at any moment, we could predict exactly what would happen in that situation. Humans are chemicals/energy.

Humans also have a soul, at least for the purposes of this discussion. The soul is independant of the physical causality, yet stilly clearly interacts with it. It can very easily be argued that the soul is what is making the decisions, and using the physical medium of our body to carry those decisions out. Ang has already mentioned this idea (aka. dualism), yet I see absolutely no problem with it as we've already accepted that the non-physical/spirit can interact with and change the physical, else God wouldn't be able to do anything other than sit and watch.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:09 pm

MooCow wrote:
Flawlessly design a simple robot. Flawlessly build it. Flawlessly script out a series of commands for it - let's say 2 meters straight, turn 90 degrees right and two meters straight, 90 degrees right, 2 meters straight. Flawlessly create an appropriate world for it within which it can execute and completely perform that script
Except God did none of those things. Except maybe the design and build part. Everything else was made with flaws.

Everythign was designed with "flaws". It is impossible for an unintended flaw to be added to something created by an omnipotent being. Therefore, he flawlessy crafted intentionally "flawed" beings.

Flawlessly script out a series of commands for it
God didn't do this.

Yes he did. He knows what you will do. If he puts atom X in position Y it means you will go to the movies instead of playing paintball. He scripted your every action as part of the design process.

if God knew what you were going to do before you were created (and, in fact, before the Universe itself was created) then you are not making decisions
Yes I am. Knowledge does not equal control.

New Analogy! Wheeee! You are walking down a corridor. There are two doors in front of you. A sadistic man with precognitivie abilities has set an explosive mine down the path you will take. All other routes have no mine within them. Do you have a choice about triggering the mine?

Keep in mind he knows exactly which way you will go, even if that way is to turn around and go back, or to punch a hole in the wall, or even if you stand still (the mine only activates after a person stands on it for a certain amount of time). Even though you appear to have an option to avoid the mine (a route exists with no mine in it), where is your ability to choose to trigger the mine or not? His knowledge and creation of the situation leave you with no real choices, regardless of how it appears from within the situation.

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:16 pm

Everythign was designed with "flaws". It is impossible for an unintended flaw to be added to something created by an omnipotent being. Therefore, he flawlessy crafted intentionally "flawed" beings.

Yes, that's what I said.

Yes he did

No.

He knows what you will do

Yes, what's your point?

If he puts atom X in position Y it means you will go to the movies instead of playing paintball.

No it doesn't, because I am not bound by fate.

He scripted your every action as part of the design process.

Part of the design process included giving me free will which does not bind me to fate.

Do you have a choice about triggering the mine?

Yes, because I chose to go down that path.