Free Will

Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 11:02 pm

Missionary wrote:

Not at all. We have boundaries we discover and describe as laws. We are free within those boundaries. When we attempt to exceed laws we meet resistance which increases exponentially until failure is reached. Free will is genuine for a set purpose: to choose between A & B. Utter freedom is illusory.

Now you are simply contradicting yourself. After this reply, you say god knows our decisions. If so, there is no freedom within any boundaries. If god knows our decisions, god knows our decisions. The end. We are forced to conform to god's prior knowledge. Your attempt to distinguish between types of force in this case utterly fails.

Bye.

Newbie First Class Joined: Mar 29, 2008 Posts: 48

It may officially be time to move on. Trying to convince someone that a “God” who has an exact knowledge of all of our future actions while we at the same time have free will is a contradiction, is kind of like debating that the color red is in fact the color red. It’s obvious and not worth debating. At some point you have to throw up your arms and realize that there’s no convincing the fellow. Next thing you know he’ll have us trying to convince him that the moon in not made of cheese. I don’t say this to be disrespectful, but clearly the debate is going nowhere and IMHO it’s getting silly.

Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 7:19 am

Missionary wrote:

G has advance knowledge that a choice between A&B will result in A.

Under this scenario, we live in a strictly deterministic reality.

Quote:

G does not determine or cause A to be done by advance knowledge.

It’s irrelevant what or who is the cause. It only matters that there IS a predeterminable cause.

Quote:

G can and does determine that C will be done by G.

Irrelevant to the first premise

Quote:

Where C intersects A or B, A&B are prevented by Laws.

also irrelevant. I find it cute how you capitalize the word law to give it power... hehe

I will restate this again. If all future actions/events are absolutely predictable we live in a predetermined reality.

Missionary wrote:

My premise

P)2 If you must do A, then you have no choice in the matter. (P2 is same as your premise)

Then you understand that there can be no actual free will under your scenario.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

kmisho wrote:

Missionary wrote:

Not at all. We have boundaries we discover and describe as laws. We are free within those boundaries. When we attempt to exceed laws we meet resistance which increases exponentially until failure is reached. Free will is genuine for a set purpose: to choose between A & B. Utter freedom is illusory.

Now you are simply contradicting yourself. After this reply, you say god knows our decisions. If so, there is no freedom within any boundaries. If god knows our decisions, god knows our decisions. The end. We are forced to conform to god's prior knowledge. Your attempt to distinguish between types of force in this case utterly fails.

Bye.

Your logic is stuck. To whom exactly do you attribute "force" and how?

If I see two trains coming at each other on the same track I have foreknowledge they will collide. But I am not determining this by my will nor am I causing the collision. God can see the collision last week or last millennium AND He didn't cause it.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

MockingGods wrote:

I will restate this again. If all future actions/events are absolutely predictable we live in a predetermined reality.

Then you understand that there can be no actual free will under your scenario.

I can predetermine that a party will begin at 7pm and end at 12am. I can determine what food will be there, who will attend, what music is played, and what seating is available. Once the guests arrive, I control the environment but the guests party at their free will within the guidelines that I set.

I am not predetermining what they say, do, act or who they do that with. I am not CAUSING anything. Add to that scenario my foreknowledge of what they say, do where they stand and who they interact with. I still did not CAUSE their actions. I controlled the environment and had foreknowledge.

That is not predetermination of the people. That is foreknowledge.

Newbie First Class Joined: Jan 08, 2008 Posts: 27

The only way to know with absolute certainty is to force an action. The only way to know where the people will stand at your party is to force them to stand there, and the same with what they say and do and interact with. It's just like your foreknowledge of the music and food and time, you had to force it to be that way for you to have absolute foreknowledge. Without force, it is not absolute, it's merely "a good idea" or possibly a logical prediction.

If you were to ask people to bring what ever food, music, and guests, your foreknowledge is lost, due to the free-will of your invited party guests. One can not exist with the other.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

Sliced_Bread wrote:

The only way to know with absolute certainty is to force an action. The only way to know where the people will stand at your party is to force them to stand there, and the same with what they say and do and interact with. It's just like your foreknowledge of the music and food and time, you had to force it to be that way for you to have absolute foreknowledge. Without force, it is not absolute, it's merely "a good idea" or possibly a logical prediction.

If you were to ask people to bring what ever food, music, and guests, your foreknowledge is lost, due to the free-will of your invited party guests. One can not exist with the other.

But I don't force them to stand in a certain place or speak to a certain person. They are free to roam the premises; interact as they please. Now, I may intervene if they choose to begin destroying my house. There are laws and boundaries. But I do not control their decisions, behaviors, or actions nor do I cause them. They are free moral agents within my controlled environment.

Newbie First Class Joined: Jan 08, 2008 Posts: 27

Missionary wrote:

Sliced_Bread wrote:

The only way to know with absolute certainty is to force an action. The only way to know where the people will stand at your party is to force them to stand there, and the same with what they say and do and interact with. It's just like your foreknowledge of the music and food and time, you had to force it to be that way for you to have absolute foreknowledge. Without force, it is not absolute, it's merely "a good idea" or possibly a logical prediction.

If you were to ask people to bring what ever food, music, and guests, your foreknowledge is lost, due to the free-will of your invited party guests. One can not exist with the other.

But I don't force them to stand in a certain place or speak to a certain person. They are free to roam the premises; interact as they please. Now, I may intervene if they choose to begin destroying my house. There are laws and boundaries. But I do not control their decisions, behaviors, or actions nor do I cause them. They are free moral agents within my controlled environment.

...and in that case you don't have the foreknowledge of their actions, like you claimed.

Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 8:01 am

Missionary wrote:

That is not predetermination of the people. That is foreknowledge.

You are hopelessly confused dear sir. If, as you claim, only one action can be chosen, there can be no such thing as free will. It matters not who or what is doing the determination. The claim of this god’s absolute foreknowledge only opens the door to this scenario; it doesn’t have to be the cause of it.

Quote:

I can predetermine that a party will begin at 7pm and end at 12am. I can determine what food will be there, who will attend, what music is played, and what seating is available. Once the guests arrive, I control the environment but the guests party at their free will within the guidelines that I set.

I am not predetermining what they say, do, act or who they do that with. I am not CAUSING anything. Add to that scenario my foreknowledge of what they say, do where they stand and who they interact with. I still did not CAUSE their actions. I controlled the environment and had foreknowledge.

This is all completely irrelevant to the discussion. You are only “inferring” certain future actions. You do not have absolute knowledge of a future that can’t be altered, a deterministic future.

Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 8:05 am

Is there a reason people keep feeding the troll? Seriously--what the hell is the problem? You will not get anywhere with it. It's an idiot apologist troll. Stop feeding it. I don't care if you think you'll get anywhere; you won't. It's not even good practice, so STOP FEEDING THE TROLL.

Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 10:51 am

Missionary wrote:

But I do not control their decisions, behaviors, or actions nor do I cause them.

And ultimately, neither do they.

Newbie First Class Joined: May 26, 2008 Posts: 29

"That's not my position at all. We have free will within legal boundaries. God foreknows the outcome without determining that outcome. This offers us a genuine choice to accept/reject God. There are certain things God foreknows that He has determined."

The fundamental and inescapable contradiction here is that God, according to Christian mythology, is not just a dispassionate observer. He is the creator of all.

An omniscient creator absolutely negates the possibility of freewill since he created you knowing everything you would do from birth to death. Since he had the option of not creating you or creating you in a different time and place which would have led to a different outcome then he effectively created you to do everything you will ever do. He created the sinner knowing he would go to hell, the child murderer, the pederast, the genocidal despot knowing that they cause untold misery. In other words he could have not created Hitler because he already knew before he ever created him that Hitler would grow up to order the murder of 8 million Jews.

He could have had Hitler be born in New York in the 1980s which certainly would have yeilded much different results. The fact he created Hitler at that time and place knowing what Hitler would do, and being all-powerful he had other options if only the option to not create him, then he affectively created Hitler to kill Jews which makes him a monster. He created the Hutu to kill the Tutsi. He created the slave owner to enlave the African. He created Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy to kill and eat young boys. He created Adam and Eve knowing they would eat of the fruit of The Tree of knowledge yet still punished mankind for it. He created Sodom and Gomorrah knowing that they would degenerate into sin but he still destroyed them for it. He created the earth, and called it good (whoops!), and then flooded it killing every man, woman, and innocent child and animal except for two of each species.That God of yours just is not a very nice fellow. Either that, or he isn't a very intelligent one.

The idea that freewill would baffle an omniscient being is absurd. That is the worst cop-out imaginable and shows a lack of character on the part of God to shift blame from himself onto his creations. God is either stupid, evil, apathetic, or non-existent. Take your pick.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 513

Quote:

The idea that freewill would baffle an omniscient being is absurd.

Almost as absurd is the notion that freewill can exist in a predetermined world and an omniscient god can know the ending without knowing everything that happens in the middle. Even more absurd is how Missionary can't seem to comprehend how this doesn't work.

Quote:

Is there a reason people keep feeding the troll? Seriously--what the hell is the problem? You will not get anywhere with it. It's an idiot apologist troll. Stop feeding it. I don't care if you think you'll get anywhere; you won't. It's not even good practice, so STOP FEEDING THE TROLL.

You don't know, we might get somewhere (or maybe not). But we should still allow theists to come and post here, even if they are as stubborn as Missionary. They want to know why we atheists believe what we believe, so we shall tell them.

Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 4:34 pm

Well said WrathJW, I was eventually heading to this obvious relationship as well. I figured because our guest can't seem to grasp the simple concept of an immutable future being deterministic, this concept might as yet a bit over his head. Thanks for that insightful post.

Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 10:29 pm

Missionary wrote:

kmisho wrote:

Missionary wrote:

Not at all. We have boundaries we discover and describe as laws. We are free within those boundaries. When we attempt to exceed laws we meet resistance which increases exponentially until failure is reached. Free will is genuine for a set purpose: to choose between A & B. Utter freedom is illusory.

Now you are simply contradicting yourself. After this reply, you say god knows our decisions. If so, there is no freedom within any boundaries. If god knows our decisions, god knows our decisions. The end. We are forced to conform to god's prior knowledge. Your attempt to distinguish between types of force in this case utterly fails.

Bye.

Your logic is stuck. To whom exactly do you attribute "force" and how?

If I see two trains coming at each other on the same track I have foreknowledge they will collide. But I am not determining this by my will nor am I causing the collision. God can see the collision last week or last millennium AND He didn't cause it.

Whether you must do it because it is part of god's knowledge or if he uses his magical hand to actually make you do it, "force" is a good name for it.

You have it backwards. Your illogic is stuck.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore