iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) (03/12/85)
In article <221@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA> hua@cmu-cs-gandalf.UUCP writes: >If God is omniscient, he knows what I'm thinking and what I will do. >Therefore, I don't have freedom of choice. If at some point in my life >I will have to choose between a or b, God knows I will pick "a". Therefore >I can't pick b. But yet he gets upset at people's choices, even though >he knows they had no alternative. > >The only way out of this is if God doesn't know absolutely everything. >Therefore, he isn't omniscient. Since omniscience is a power, he can't >be omnipotent. > >Chris Larsen at CMU This raises a very interesting question (apologies if this has been beaten to death already). One of the unquestionable characteristics of God, at least for most people, is that he is omniscient. Presumably, this omniscience includes knowledge of the future. I think there are few people who hold traditional views of religion (even if they are unbelievers) who would contest this.(Of course I always expect flames anyway :-)) So if God always knows with certainty beforehand that we will do X at time t, then we have no freedom NOT to do X at time t. Knowledge by definition is "justified true belief", which means that that which is known is TRUE. For this reason, human beings cannot restrain other humans' freedom by predicting their actions -- humans may have BELIEF of future actions, but they have no KNOWLEDGE. But God does have knowledge. So how do we evade the conclusion that God's foreknowledge of all human actions,thoughts, etc. prevents them from being freely done, in other words, human beings have no real free will? It seems we have no choice but to say that either human beings really *have* no free will, or that God does not exist. If I have not explained myself clearly, I will undoubtedly have a chance later to do so. -- Dave Iannucci St. Joseph's University, Philadelphia ...{allegra|astrovax|bpa|burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (03/15/85)
In article <941@sjuvax.UUCP> iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) writes: > This raises a very interesting question (apologies if this >has been beaten to death already). It has. > One of the unquestionable characteristics >of God, at least for most people, is that he is omniscient. Presumably, this >omniscience includes knowledge of the future. I think there are few people >who hold traditional views of religion (even if they are unbelievers) who >would >contest this. > So if God always knows with certainty beforehand >that we will do X at time t, then we have no freedom NOT to do X at time t. >Knowledge by definition is "justified true belief", which means that that >which is known is TRUE. For this reason, human beings cannot restrain >other humans' freedom by predicting their actions -- humans may have BELIEF >of future actions, but they have no KNOWLEDGE. But God does have knowledge. >So how do we evade the conclusion that God's foreknowledge of all human >actions,thoughts, etc. prevents them from being freely done, in other words, >human beings have no real free will? > > It seems we have no choice but to say that either human beings really >*have* no free will, or that God does not exist. Sigh. I suppose that I should run through this again. The error in the above argument is that it implicitly assumes that a god must exist sequentially in time in the same way humans do. There is no reason to conclude this, however; it is not a part of any traditional formulation of divinity, and it is not required by any other property. If God is truly omnipotent, then he need not be bound by time. Now if God does not exist in time, then all the problems stated above simply dissolve. The knowing that an event will happen and the event itself "happen at the same time", from the divine perspective. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe
teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (03/19/85)
> > In article <221@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA> hua@cmu-cs-gandalf.UUCP writes: > >If God is omniscient, he knows what I'm thinking and what I will do. > >Therefore, I don't have freedom of choice. If at some point in my life > >I will have to choose between a or b, God knows I will pick "a". Therefore > >I can't pick b. But yet he gets upset at people's choices, even though > >he knows they had no alternative. > > > >The only way out of this is if God doesn't know absolutely everything. > >Therefore, he isn't omniscient. Since omniscience is a power, he can't > >be omnipotent. > > > >Chris Larsen at CMU > > > This raises a very interesting question (apologies if this > has been beaten to death already). One of the unquestionable characteristics > of God, at least for most people, is that he is omniscient. Presumably, this > omniscience includes knowledge of the future. I think there are few people who > hold traditional views of religion (even if they are unbelievers) who would > contest this.(Of course I always expect flames anyway :-)) > > So if God always knows with certainty beforehand > that we will do X at time t, then we have no freedom NOT to do X at time t. > Knowledge by definition is "justified true belief", which means that that > which is known is TRUE. For this reason, human beings cannot restrain > other humans' freedom by predicting their actions -- humans may have BELIEF > of future actions, but they have no KNOWLEDGE. But God does have knowledge. > So how do we evade the conclusion that God's foreknowledge of all human actions,thoughts, etc. prevents them from being freely done, in other words, human > beings have no real free will? > > It seems we have no choice but to say that either human beings really > *have* no free will, or that God does not exist. If I have not explained > myself clearly, I will undoubtedly have a chance later to do so. As has been argued before, G-D exists in a timeless environment. If so there is no past present or future. For G-D to know what I will do is the same as to know what I did, because if there is no time there is no did or will do. Eliyahu Teitz.
pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) (03/19/85)
> As has been argued before, G-D exists in a timeless environment. > If so there is no past present or future. For G-D to know what I will do > is the same as to know what I did, because if there is no time there is no > did or will do. > > Eliyahu Teitz. Right. Supposed contradictions between God's omniscience and our free will arise from the assumption that God must exist within time as we do; that he knows the future in the sense that a fortune teller might. A better way is to think about his omniscience in terms of his perspective on the universe. For example, a being who has the vantage point of being able to see both the sun and earth at the same time (without existing at a great distance from each, of course--God does not exist in space either [omnipresence]) also has a view of the earth's future by several minutes. If the sun would burn out he would know it right away, several minutes in advance of those existing on earth. Knowledge of the future in this sense does not imply the knower caused the future event or willed it to happen. God does not know the future as such. Time is just another dimension in his perspective. -- Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd
root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) (03/21/85)
>> It seems we have no choice but to say that either human beings really >> *have* no free will, or that God does not exist. If I have not explained >> myself clearly, I will undoubtedly have a chance later to do so. > > As has been argued before, G-D exists in a timeless environment. > If so there is no past present or future. For G-D to know what I will do > is the same as to know what I did, because if there is no time there is no > did or will do. Which doesn't even address the issue... The above is a view derived from C.S. Lewis... I think. Anyway the existance of an omniscient being such as God does in no way eliminate your free will to carry out your actions. If God excersised his will over you then you might have a point. Consider: If God is omniscient and we close him up in a black box someplace, how does his ability to see your future violate your free will? It doesn't since he has no effect on your process to make decisions and act. -- UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO "And Frith made the world"
meister@faron.UUCP (Philip W. Servita) (03/22/85)
(Shortened for brevity, and we've all seen these args before many times...) In article <1284@aecom.UUCP> teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) writes: >> >> In article <221@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA> hua@cmu-cs-gandalf.UUCP writes: >> >If God is omniscient, he knows what I'm thinking and what I will do. >> >Therefore, I don't have freedom of choice. If at some point in my life >> >I will have to choose between a or b, God knows I will pick "a". Therefore >> >I can't pick b. But yet he gets upset at people's choices, even though >> >he knows they had no alternative. >> >Chris Larsen at CMU >> It seems we have no choice but to say that either human beings >> really *have* no free will, or that God does not exist. If I have not >> explained myself clearly, I will undoubtedly have a chance later to do so. > > As has been argued before, G-D exists in a timeless environment. > If so there is no past present or future. For G-D to know what I will do > is the same as to know what I did, because if there is no time there is no > did or will do. > > Eliyahu Teitz. I for one am tired of this cop-out, as advanced by Wingate, Teitz, and many other people i have talked with. so once and for all, it will be laid to rest: AXIOM #1: God is omnipotent. Axiom #2: God is omniscient. AXIOM #3: God exists in a timeless environment. We do not. Question: Can God Make a Decision? case NO: Axiom 1 says that God is omnipotent. case NO is a contradiction. case YES: We assume God can make a decision. This immediately implies the next question to ask: Question 2: Can God Change His/Her/Its/Whatevers Mind? case NO: This contradicts Axiom 1 as before. case YES: We assume God can change his/her/its/whatevers mind. Axiom #2 says that God is omniscient. Axiom #3 says that God exists in a timeless environment. Conclusion: God knew he would change his mind(in gods terms, he already did) hence there was no decision to make. Gods action was determined for all eternity (in gods terms, NOW). hence: GOD CANNOT MAKE A FREELY DETERMINED DECISION. THERE ARE NO DECISIONS FOR GOD TO MAKE. this yet again contradicts axiom 1. Now the Ultimate Conclusion: GOD DOES NOT HAVE FREE WILL!!!! This all stems from the addition of Axiom 3, the "timeless environment" axiom. Note that theorem proving in logic DOES NOT REQUIRE A TIME DOMAIN. All theorems in a given formal system are completely determined from the initial axioms, whether or not any of them can actually be proven. In laymans terms, THIS PROOF IS VALID IN A TIMELESS DOMAIN. Hence (option 1) we must throw out Axiom 3. Of course, By the original Free Will Argument, We then have to throw out Axiom 2, which then invalidates Axiom 1. (option 2 is to say that humans do not have free will) QED. Unfortunately, the Wingates and the Teitzes still have one more thing they COULD put forth: Axiom #4: God exists in a logic-less environment. We do not. Conclusion: everybody should unsubscribe to net.religion. -the venn buddhist PS. I personally choose option 1. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- is anything really trash before you throw it away? ---------------------------------------------------------------------
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (03/24/85)
I really wasn't going to get involved in the whole debate on the apparent incompatibility of free will and total prescience. But the "God being outside time" argument really bugs me. The argument goes like this: We have freedom despite the fact that God knows what we are going to do, because for God the past, present, and future exist "at once". God is outside time. The problem is that this totally destroys the usual monotheistic view of creation, and leaves us even less free than before. God did not create the universe, watch man disobey, send the prophets, and so on. Instead, it was all created at once. God made the Garden at the same time he made the disobedience of Adam, at the same time as he made the war with the Canaanites, at the same time he made the crucifixion, at the same time he is making this letter I am sending. Every decision made by a human was actually created directly by God. No other view is compatible with the two assumptions of (1) divine creation of the Universe and (2) coexistence of all eras from a divine perspective. The "God is outside time" argument is really just a ploy to try to avoid discussing the subject by placing God outside the normal rules. But it is possible to consider the ramifications of the new rules as well, and we still wind up with a total lack of freedom. -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!"
teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (03/27/85)
> I for one am tired of this cop-out, as advanced by Wingate, Teitz, and many > other people i have talked with. so once and for all, it will be laid to > rest: > > AXIOM #1: > God is omnipotent. > Axiom #2: > God is omniscient. > AXIOM #3: > God exists in a timeless environment. We do not. > > Question: Can God Make a Decision? Before you get started you must define how G-D does anything. Forget not, that not only does G-D not exist in a timed environment, He also does not have any environment or bounds to His existence. ( I saw your last point so don't think I didn't read the article before responding ). What your whole article boils down to is the age old question: If G-D can do anything, can He make a stone He can't lift? Think about it for a while and repost when you find the fallacy in the question. Eliyahu Teitz.
teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (03/28/85)
> > The "God is outside time" argument is really just a ploy to try to avoid > discussing the subject by placing God outside the normal rules. But it is > possible to consider the ramifications of the new rules as well, and we > still wind up with a total lack of freedom. But if G-d created the game He is not normal ( and therefore cannot be judged by normal rules ). Eliyahu Teitz.
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (03/30/85)
Quote from teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) Thu Mar 28 13:04:08 1985: > > The "God is outside time" argument is really just a ploy to try to avoid > > discussing the subject by placing God outside the normal rules. But it is > > possible to consider the ramifications of the new rules as well, and we > > still wind up with a total lack of freedom. > > But if G-d created the game He is not normal ( and therefore cannot be > judged by normal rules ). That was the entirety of the response. Teitz edited out the paragraphs preceding, in which I showed in detail the fallacy of his argument. I ask you: Is this an intellectually honest way to discuss the subject? (Besides which, he didn't even respond adequately to the little piece he left in! As I said, the normal rules may not apply, but the argument does not even make sense under the SPECIAL rules Teitz tried to introduce.) -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!"