Free will and omniscience

[MarkCorrigan]

When it comes to what Avalon is saying in this thread's OP, I would think a good analogy in support of his version of free will would be that if you could somehow go back in time before someone chooses something, and you know what they are choosing, they would still be freely choosing.

No they wouldn't.

In order for the choice to be free and legitimate, then the foreseen future even would need to be malleable. If there is ONE future outcome to a choice that cannot be altered then there is no real choice. If someone knows you will choose X you cannot choose not X. It's fairly simple.

You may think you have the choice, you may decide on your own and weigh up the pros and cons, but that's no more than an illusion. No matter how long you take to decide, you WILL do X. Any other answer is impossible, and thus there is no choice.

 

[HansMustermann]

Let's look at some practical examples from the bible itself. And, hey, they must be literally true, right?

John 9 tells us about Jesus meeting a guy blind from birth, and apparently, according to Jesus, he's not blind as punishment for some sin, his or his parents, but basically so Jesus can do a miracle on him.

Now consider all the ways that free will can nix that encounter, since we're talking an adult there. At any point in his past, he could have taken a decision that would result in his not being there for Jesus to do a miracle. E.g., he decides to kill himself, because, frankly, being blind from birth sucks. He or his parents could decide to move to another town. He could at some point decide to eat food X instead of Y, and die of some food poisoning or of stuff like a stroke if it's food contaminated with ergot.He could decide to go beg on some other street. He could decide to say something stupid and get himself stoned. Etc.

Heck, even starting at the point where Jesus enters the scene, he could defend himself against someone who, for all he knows, is a crazy guy trying to put mud in his eyes. He could decide to go home and wash instead of going to the pool Jesus told him to, because, hey, it's relatively far away and down some steps, and he's blind. He could even take a wrong step, fall and crack his head, so there's be no completing the miracle. Etc.

For God to have planned that a couple of decades in advance, the blind guy must have no real choice but to be there and do exactly what he's told.

 

[AvalonXQ]

For God to have planned that a couple of decades in advance, the blind guy must have no real choice but to be there and do exactly what he's told.

Or... the blind guy had every choice, and God knew he would end up there anyway. Just like I would if I came from the future.

 

[AvalonXQ]

No they wouldn't.

Well, if you insist that even a future time traveller's knowledge, having no affect on the scenario whatsoever, would negate free will, I have to figure you and I don't mean the same thing by the term "free will".

I think your definition has something to do with indeterminism, but whatever it is, if a person can make a decision entirely on their own with neither coercion or constrainst and still not have "free will" entirely because of what someone somewhere does or doesn't know about them, it certainly isn't "free will" as I recognize it.

 

[Good Lt]

Or... the blind guy had every choice, and God knew he would end up there anyway. Just like I would if I came from the future.

So...there is no such thing as freedom.

Your god creates everyone knowing who's damned long in advance, and setting it up that way. And he commands them to be well, even though he knows they won't be.

It's all part of the plan to create people you know are damned and to let them pretend they're not as if they can make a decision you know they won't make anyway.

Morality!

If a person can make a decision entirely on their own with neither coercion or constrainst and still not have "free will" entirely because of what someone somewhere does or doesn't know about them, it certainly isn't "free will" as I recognize it.

They're not making a decision.

They're just doing what your god set them to do. They can't decide anything else, according to your model. They are incapable (ie, not free) of making a decision that your god didn't know they would make - that would negate your god's omniscience.

 

[pakeha]

^
And you definition is...?

...What precisely is the change that a being that in no way influences the decision itself has on the free will of the event simply by knowing its outcome?

Why even posit the being?

Or... the blind guy had every choice, and God knew he would end up there anyway. Just like I would if I came from the future.

So there is no free will?

 

[AvalonXQ]

So...there is no such thing as freedom.

Sure there is.

Again, since when is freedom defined by foreknowledge? Freedom is defined by lack of constraint.

There is nothing about someone's knowledge of your decision that magically removes your choice from the process of getting to it.

 

[AvalonXQ]

So there is no free will?

Why not?

 

[joobz]

Or... the blind guy had every choice, and God knew he would end up there anyway. Just like I would if I came from the future.

If you believe in the multiple timeline concept, then yes. But if there is one and only one true timeline, then there is no free will.

 

[AvalonXQ]

If you believe in the multiple timeline concept, then yes. But if there is one and only one true timeline, then there is no free will.

Why not?

 

[Good Lt]

Sure there is.

Again, since when is freedom defined by foreknowledge? Freedom is defined by lack of constraint.

There is nothing about someone's knowledge of your decision that magically removes your choice from the process of getting to it.

There is no choice.

You're only doing what you were sent to do. According to the plan. And there is no deviating or getting away from the plan.

If you're destined for hell from even before you're born, there is no way for you not to go.

There are no surprises for your god. A man is not free to make a decision that would otherwise alter his fate.

It has nothing to do with coercion. It has to do with being part of a plan you are not able to change.

If you're part of a plan you can't deviate from, you have no freedom. You're a pawn.

And your god is responsible for sending people to hell under this model.

 

[joobz]

Why not?

one timeline means one and only one set of choices to be made.
Hence, no choice.

 

[Good Lt]

Why not?

Because your outcome is predetermined.

Your god has made the outcome that god wants already.

It doesn't matter what man wants or decides.

Therefore, there no freedom.

Is there a decision a person is capable of making that would contravene a path that god had set a person on? Can your god create a man whose course he himself can not predict?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Sure there is.

Again, since when is freedom defined by foreknowledge? Freedom is defined by lack of constraint.

There is nothing about someone's knowledge of your decision that magically removes your choice from the process of getting to it.

Yes, there is.

If they KNOW you will do one thing, you cannot do anything else.

Why aren't you getting this?

Let's say god knows you will do X. Doesn't matter what X is.

You are presented with options X, Y and Z. Which ones CAN you choose?

 

[AvalonXQ]

X, Y, and Z.

 

[joobz]

X, Y, and Z.

If god is real, and omniscient, then that is the only answer you could have given.

 

[Mister Agenda]

Well, if you insist that even a future time traveller's knowledge, having no affect on the scenario whatsoever, would negate free will, I have to figure you and I don't mean the same thing by the term "free will".

The time traveller's knowledge doesn't negate free will. The time traveler's knowledge means there never was such a thing as free will, it was always an illusion. From the time traveler's perspective, things that have not yet happened for you are history for her, and the choices are: you must do what the time traveler already knows you will do, meaning predestination is the case and free will is an illusion; or you can do something else, meaning the future is not fixed and the time traveler's knowledge is unreliable. The latter seems unlikely because it means things in the time traveler's past are mutable, but travelling far enough into the past to affect events is paradoxical anyway, so for purposes of the thought experiment I think it's okay to entertain the notion.

 

[arthwollipot]

I kind of agree with AvalonXQ here - up to a point. An observer of a choice does not affect that choice, even if the observer knows what choice will be made.

However, the Christian God is not a mere observer. Generally, whatever God wills comes to pass. God determines events.

Pharaoh did not use free will when he refused to let the Israelites free. God had hardened his heart. Does God make some things happen and not others?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

So you're saying that even though you ARE going to pick X, you can pick Y?

 

[Good Lt]

X, Y, and Z.

False.

You will 'choose' what your god has determined and willed that you will choose. And not anything else.