Freewill

Nick Soapdish · Feb 10, 2005

An interesting side track is that I would assert that materialism does imply freewill cannot exist. Earlier in my adult life I was a materialist. It was this realization that initially pushed me down the path of theism. I decided that materialism was in disagreement with my personal experience.

If everything in this Universe is decided by the laws of physics, including all aspects of our own minds, then our will would be determined by these laws too. Each decision we make could be predicted by the outcome of a vast mathematic calculation. Our actions would be the consequence of how the particles in our head happen to bounce around. This would imply that we do not really have freewill, but rather our minds are enslaved to the mechanisms we use physics to describe.

The materialist would have to believe that our will is entirely based on a combination of our genetic dispositions and our learned behaviors, which are all driven from external factors other than our "self". To them, there is no "soul" or "spirit" inside, driving us around.

Scuba Pete · Feb 10, 2005

then our will would be determined by these laws too.

Fortunately,

Our astronauts refuse to be bound by these "laws".

No*s · Feb 10, 2005

Lycan said:
Taking a few things into consideration:

1. god is supposedly omniscient - all wise, all knowing
2. he knows every exact detail of everything that has happened or ever will happen - see 1.
3. god is supposedly infallable and therefore cannot be wrong.

How can there possibly be freewill with the god described above?

Lycan

Lycan,

I tried to work through this problem once before. If we're dealing with the Christian God, there is one more piece to add to the puzzle that throws the syllogism completely off: almost all of Christianity recognizes freewill. That makes it something of an immutable part of the equation.

The first flawed assumption, is that you have a consideration that God's knowledge interacts with our will in the same way the same knowledge would between two humans. God isn't a man. He isn't limited as we are.

I heard it explained many ways, but I think the most powerful explanation is that in the Circus Maximus, the Emperor serveyed the whole Colliseum from his balcony, and viewed everyone. His gaze, though, had no power over their seating.

Another of the Fathers, St. John the Damascene, responded with this question, "Does God foresee the decision if you don't make it?" The obvious answer is "I don't know." This response highlights that God sees what we do, and we don't need to speculate on whether He sees what we didn't do. We can't know. I know the quote is off, because I don't have it handy, but the point remains the same.

Perhaps God knows what we do, because we do it, and responds to us because of how we respond. God, in His turn, responds to all our decisions, because His gaze is not inhibited by time. God, then, sees time, decisions, everything in a way differently than us, and we cannot understand it.

Lycan · Feb 10, 2005

. If you made an important decision yesterday, does your knowledge of it today mean that it was not made freely yesterday?

This is not a valid argument,for this reason.... we are not talking about a human knowing the past thus affecting the future...
We are talking about an omniscient god knowing the future, and having that knowledge, makes freewill an impossibility.

Lycan · Feb 10, 2005

almost all of Christianity recognizes freewill. That makes it something of an immutable part of the equation.

This point makes absolutely no difference. I am not speaking of any specific god, I am speaking of any god that is defined as omniscient, whatever the religion.

I heard it explained many ways, but I think the most powerful explanation is that in the Circus Maximus, the Emperor serveyed the whole Colliseum from his balcony, and viewed everyone. His gaze, though, had no power over their seating.

Human analogies also do not work for this argument, we are not talking about humans, we are talking about an omniscient god. Seeing everyone does not equate with knowledge of everyone.

Perhaps God knows what we do, because we do it, and responds to us because of how we respond. God, in His turn, responds to all our decisions, because His gaze is not inhibited by time. God, then, sees time, decisions, everything in a way differently than us, and we cannot understand it.

Being able to "see" is not synonymous with being all knowing...

What is there to understand? If a god is defined as being omniscient (all knowing) then he/she/it knows everything right? Or is it that he/she/it knows everything except? At that point he/she/it would not be omniscient...

Fluffy · Feb 10, 2005

I tried to work through this problem once before. If we're dealing with the Christian God, there is one more piece to add to the puzzle that throws the syllogism completely off: almost all of Christianity recognizes freewill. That makes it something of an immutable part of the equation.

This is something I found quite interesting when I heard it from a Christian since they argued that therefore this is evidence of God doing the irrational thereby showing that his omnipotence is not limited by the laws of rationality (therefore he could make square circles etc.). Just an side note though.

The first flawed assumption, is that you have a consideration that God's knowledge interacts with our will in the same way the same knowledge would between two humans. God isn't a man. He isn't limited as we are.

I would agree with you on making a differentiation upon what we define as godly knowledge and human experience ("knowledge"). However, I do not see how you inferred that God's knowledge interacts with our free will in any way whatsoever from the limitations of the initial premises. The argument merely states that if it is possible to KNOW what happens in the future then therefore that must happen or I cannot KNOW it. My KNOWing isn't a prerequisite for the action definitely happening. It is merely a way of showing that it must happen.

"Does God foresee the decision if you don't make it?"

No he wouldn't because this implies that there are other possibilites other than the one he has seen. However, if this one is fated then the others are no longer possibilities and so God cannot see them because there is nothing to see.

Perhaps God knows what we do, because we do it, and responds to us because of how we respond. God, in His turn, responds to all our decisions, because His gaze is not inhibited by time. God, then, sees time, decisions, everything in a way differently than us, and we cannot understand it.

This comes very close to that all-purpose get out clause in my opinion which states: God is beyond human understanding so its pointless to try and debate such things as this. Well thats fair enough I suppose but it does make the debate meaningless and I assume it would be a little tiring if then every debate about a god would have to include a premise stating "assume God is not beyong human understanding". Other than that quibble, this is definitely the most logical and full proof argument against any of these sorts of arguments.

Does this argument have a name? They generally do and I wish to write an article on the board about it so it would be useful if it did. I have never come across one though but ya never know.

cardero · Feb 10, 2005

Lycan said:
This is not a valid argument,for this reason.... we are not talking about a human knowing the past thus affecting the future...
We are talking about an omniscient god knowing the future, and having that knowledge, makes freewill an impossibility.

This was my next step of reasoning. Even though GOD may know what our future holds what makes one think that he has that much of an effect that it would determine his will over ours?

angellous_evangellous · Feb 10, 2005

Lycan said:
This point makes absolutely no difference. I am not speaking of any specific god, I am speaking of any god that is defined as omniscient, whatever the religion.

I must agree. If you are not talking about the Christian God, then the Christian testimony would not matter. But because you say "whatever religion," and want information about the relationship between freewill and divine knowledge, how can you reject what you asked for? The Christian fathers would be a great place to draw knowledge from concerning this relationship. It is very complex. But, if you are disregarding what you have asked for, one testimony within many, I don't know if any of us can help you.

Nick Soapdish · Feb 10, 2005

Lycan said:
This is not a valid argument,for this reason.... we are not talking about a human knowing the past thus affecting the future...

We are talking about an omniscient god knowing the future, and having that knowledge, makes freewill an impossibility.

I am not an expert in epistemology, but I tend to agree we should consider human knowledge and divine knowledge to be different. Our knowledge is largely based on:

a) information we receive from our physical senses
b) a priori knowledge
c) logical deductions we make from knowledge in (a) and (b)

God does not have physical senses, so His knowledge is clearly different. So I am wondering what model you are using for God's knowledge if not human knowledge. If you do not have a model for His knowledge, how can you claim that it makes the human attribute of freewill illogical?

Apart from that, I am not still not clear why you would think knowledge of an action makes it so that action could not have been self-determined, regardless of whether that knowledge is possessed by man or God.

Which one do you think makes sense?

1) Something is true because God knows it
2) Gods knows something because it is true

Number 2 makes sense to me. Knowledge does not cause things to be true, but rather is a reflection of what is true. God's knowledge of a decision we will make does not force us to act that way, but rather because we will make that decision when the time comes, God knows about it.

Mister Emu · Feb 10, 2005

This is not a valid argument,for this reason.... we are not talking about a human knowing the past thus affecting the future...
We are talking about an omniscient god knowing the future, and having that knowledge, makes freewill an impossibility.

This would be an invalid arguement if you assume that there is a future that has yet to happen. Or that the omniscient God in question is bound by time. I beleive neither. It is my beleif that God is in the future, and in the past, and in the present all at once. Thus He knows everything you will ever do, because you have already done it.

may · Feb 10, 2005

the Scriptures reveal that there are situations in which God chooses not to foreknow the outcome. Just before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, he declared: "I am quite determined to go down that I may see whether they act altogether according to the outcry over it that has come to me, and, if not, I can get to know it." (Genesis 18:21) This text clearly shows us that God did not foreknow the extent of the depravity in those cities before he investigated matters.

True, God can foresee certain events, but in many cases, he has chosen not to use his foreknowledge. Because God is almighty, he is free to exercise his abilities as he wishes, not according to the wishes of imperfect humans.

Nick Soapdish · Feb 10, 2005

Mister Emu said:
Or that the omniscient God in question is bound by time.

Good point Emu.

It's like we are standing in front of a mountain, unable to see what is on the other side because we are bound to the ground. God's view from up high and he can see both sides of the mountain. In the same way, our view is bound to a specific point in time, whereas God's view is not.

On a side note, there are some interesting ideas in the Theory of Relativity that are related. According to the theory, there is some ambiguity as to whether such a thing as simultaneity exists. Past and future are meaningful only to a specific frame of reference. In order to have a frame of reference, one must have a specific location in space. Because of the coupling of space and time, past and future are meaningless with regards to an entity, unless that entity occupies space. God does not occupy space in the same way a tree or a rock would, and therefore He does not experience any past or future.

Lycan · Feb 10, 2005

carrdero said...

Even though GOD may know what our future holds what makes one think that he has that much of an effect that it would determine his will over ours?

Just the simple fact of him knowing negates any other possible outcome.

angellous_evangellous said...

...how can you reject what you asked for?

I have only debated the validity of what has been presented based on the grounds of my original argument. If it does not answer my question why should I accept it as such?

Mister emu said...

This would be an invalid arguement if you assume that there is a future that has yet to happen. Or that the omniscient God in question is bound by time.

How would it be invalid if you assume there IS a future?
Bound by time or no, by definition all knowing, is well, all knowing...

may said...

the Scriptures reveal that there are situations in which God chooses not to foreknow the outcome

The example that you give does not show that he chooses not to foreknow, it just shows he doesn't... telling he is not omniscient... and if that were so, my argument would not be relevant toward this god.

I have been accused, on this thread, of over simplification, but I tend to argue that it is being over complicated. We use human definitions all the time in debate of religion, since obviously that is all we have. I have taken the definition of a omniscient god and compared it to the definition of freewill. It is not an attack or defence of any one god or religion. The argument that humans cannot comprehend god can always be thrown out as a dispute of anything said of god(s). But this is not my point, if someone can point out to me any incorrect or illogical statements I have made and why, please do so. I am not above being proven wrong (by any stretch of the imagination) or above admitting that I am wrong.

jewscout · Feb 10, 2005

Lycan,
We've talked about this at some length before let me put it to you this way...
As i have stated before, in the Jewish traditions and teaching of the Rambam there are only 2 beings in the whole of the world with free will, man and G-d. Do i believe that G-d knows every single possible outcome and the infinite alternatives of our choices? Yes
Do i believe that mankind has the ability to choose from those infinite possible choices? Yes
G-d is basically saying, here is an infinite number of choices you could choose and in someway reflects a part of you. I am giving you the choice of picking one of them and accepting any and all after effects of that choice. But don't worry any choice you make is not going to surprise or shock me.

G-d chooses to restrain Himself and His power so that we may grow and change on our own. He doesn't want to force us to do things and take away our ability to choose because that would destroy us as beings. Free will is a tool for us to approach the Divine, or to reject it if we so choose.
W/o it there would be no need for a covenant of any kind nor repentence nor even a need to better ourselves as human beings. Like i said before, without free will there is no difference between Hitler and the Pope.

However from our previous discussion i take it your a believer in predestination...or am i totally off base on that thought? (which wouldn't be the first time

)

No*s · Feb 10, 2005

Lycan said:
This point makes absolutely no difference. I am not speaking of any specific god, I am speaking of any god that is defined as omniscient, whatever the religion.

I'm sorry. I thought you were specifying the Christian God.

Lycan said:
Human analogies also do not work for this argument, we are not talking about humans, we are talking about an omniscient god. Seeing everyone does not equate with knowledge of everyone.

Being able to "see" is not synonymous with being all knowing...

You are quite right. Human analogies are not accurate, but all we have are analogies. That's the very best your logic can be. In other words, I don't think what we can reason about God any more reliable than what I said. In fact, I trust the experience of God (the analogies came from men with such experience) more than speculation.

Lycan said:
What is there to understand? If a god is defined as being omniscient (all knowing) then he/she/it knows everything right? Or is it that he/she/it knows everything except? At that point he/she/it would not be omniscient...

Fluffy just said it appropriately. If God is not limited, then why should he be limited to the way humans perceive the world, and this includes logic? That was the point I was trying to make.

If He is has no limits on His knowledge, no limit to His capacity, etc., then it's a pretty big bit to assume that He is limited in that He cannot know something without deciding it.

jewscout · Feb 10, 2005

No*s said:
If He is has no limits on His knowledge, no limit to His capacity, etc., then it's a pretty big bit to assume that He is limited in that He cannot know something without deciding it.

I like that! I'd frubal ya No*s but it says i gotta spread it out....later tho!

Mister Emu · Feb 10, 2005

How would it be invalid if you assume there IS a future?

Sorry let me clarify, I was referring to atofel's post. Which would be invalid if there was an as of yet un-happened future or the God in question was bound by time.

Bound by time or no, by definition all knowing, is well, all knowing...

True, but to the meat of my point was, that it is my belief that God is in the past, present, and future at the same time, your life is not predetermined, He has just already seen what you are going to choose to do, because you have done it already.

No*s · Feb 10, 2005

jewscout said:
I like that! I'd frubal ya No*s but it says i gotta spread it out....later tho!

Hehe, thanks Jewscout

. It' sthe thought that counts.

Lycan · Feb 10, 2005

Do i believe that G-d knows every single possible outcome and the infinite alternatives of our choices? Yes

But...
He also knows the exact decision you will make... and this is the basis of my argument...

Human analogies are not accurate, but all we have are analogies

I don't know if this is a misunderstand on my part or yours. What I meant by human analogy is that using a human in your analogy as representing god.( I hope that makes sense)

In fact, I trust the experience of God (the analogies came from men with such experience) more than speculation.

But in the end isn't all just speculation (opinion, perception)

He has just already seen what you are going to choose to do, because you have done it already.

So at that point does it not nullify any other possible outcome?

No*s · Feb 10, 2005

Lycan said:
But...
He also knows the exact decision you will make... and this is the basis of my argument...

So? If we make that decision because it's our choice, what's the problem? Knowledge does not equate to coercion. It took me a long time to realize that.

Lycan said:
I don't know if this is a misunderstand on my part or yours. What I meant by human analogy is that using a human in your analogy as representing god.( I hope that makes sense)

It's my fault. I wasn't clear. God is, by His very nature, incomprehensible. When we reason up, we can only do so with the way we see and understand the world. However, all the rules we are used to are part of the natural order, or they are constructs we use to understand our enviroment. Logic is the latter.

Since God is so utterly different, even the most crisp logic is at best an analogy, and at worst speculation, without the experience of the divine or revelation...and even then, there is the possibility of deception/delusion.

Lycan said:
But in the end isn't all just speculation (opinion, perception)

I believe these men had experience with the divine. As such, I trust many of their comments (that which is in accord with the other Fathers), because I believe this. If, however, one doesn't believe it, then they're just running off at the mouth like everyone else.

Lycan said:
So at that point does it not nullify any other possible outcome?

Why should it? We are talking about a being not limited to time, not limited to space, not limited in power, etc. Why should constraints that would exist on our knowledge/existence/decisions apply to Him? If we are to prove God's foreknowledge necessitates predestination, then we have to first establish the nature of the foreknowledge, but we have no way of understanding that at all.

Like St. Gregory of Nyssa said. He first, when he experienced God, saw blinding light and an enlightening of his mind. He progressed further, and he found nothing but darkness. God is incomprehensible.

Freewill

Secret Agent

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Captain Obvious

Preternatural

Preternatural

A fool

Citizen Mod

angellous_evangellous

Guest

Secret Agent

Emu Extraordinaire

Well-Known Member

Secret Agent

Preternatural

Religious Zionist

Captain Obvious

Religious Zionist

Emu Extraordinaire

Captain Obvious

Preternatural

Captain Obvious