david@ssc-vax.UUCP (David Norris) (02/23/84)
Jon White replied to my latest entry into the free will discussion: > David Norris may be having "fun" in this discussion, but thus far he has > contributed little of substance... I hope this discussion isn't going to drift into the "ad hominem" type of argument we find so frequently on the net. For brevity's sake, I have deleted the rest of this type of material from Jon's article. Jon asked me to reply to each point in turn. I'll try (again) to reply to points 1 and 2, which are sufficient for now. But I think that we are beating a dead horse. > 1. It should be obvious that an omnipotent and omniscient being would not be > constrained by "our" time. Therefore, God, by definition, is in a constant > state of being everywhere (past, present, and future) at once. Because God > exists in the future (as well as everywhere else), it stands to reason that > there must be a future out there for Him to exist in. Therefore, God must > have created the entire lifetime of the universe at the moment of creation. > 2. If you accept the model set forth in step #1 (the entire lifetime of the > universe already exists), then you must accept that all of our individual > destinies are preordained by God. That is, we do not have free will. There are two problems with this: 1. Firstly, the statements in themselves cheat. Examples: a) "..created entire lifetime of the universe at the moment of creation" b) "..entire lifetime of the universe already exists" See? What does it mean that the entire lifetime of the universe already exists? Reworded, "the future already exists." Do you mean it exists *now*? The future doesn't exist *now*, it exists in the future. *Now* is a difficult word to apply to God, since it was invented and refers to being "inside" of time. Our past, present, and future are all part of God's infinite Now. God does not exist in the "future". He exists. Of course, the point I'm trying to make is that trying to prove Jon's point by "reaching outside of time", so to speak, is doomed to failure, because such questions are simply unaddressable. What was God doing before time began? The questioner is cheating; he has to reach back into time to phrase his question (as evidenced by the word "before"). If you disagree, keep the original question in mind and answer "When was the moment of creation?" This is yet another trick question, yet is the substance on which Jon's argument is founded. 2. This is going to sound like my old argument. You may assume, for the moment, that God does not exist. Does the concept of being "outside" time have any meaning? If so, then (by your argument) none of us have free will, since the future "already exists." It is important to note that this conclusion can be drawn outside of God Himself, and his omniwhatever. If you would state that there is no such thing as being "outside" time, I suggest talking to a physicist. At any rate, the omniscience or omnipotence of God has nothing to do with the argument. In summary, then, it seems there are the following choices: a) God is omnixxx, and we do not have free will b) God is not omnixxx, and we have free will c) the future exists, and we do not have free will d) the future does not as yet exist, and we have free will What has happened, I think, is that I have shown (a) to be false by saying that knowledge does not imply control. Jon's argument seems to revolve around (c), which, as I have said, cannot be properly addressed. If you disagree, be sure and include answers to the questions posed in #1 above. (This is still good fun!) -- David Norris :-) -- uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david
jonw@azure.UUCP (Jonathan White) (02/24/84)
Thanks, David, for at least responding in some way to two of my five points. Before going any further, I will mention that I too hope that this discussion will not drift into "ad hominem" argument. Unfortunately, your brief quote from me that was taken out of context may have given readers the impression that I was engaging in this form of argument. When I said the you had "contributed little of substance," I was expressing frustration that you had not directly addressed any of my major points. I then summarized those points to substantiate my claim. Here are the two points that David chose to address: > 1. It should be obvious that an omnipotent and omniscient being would not be > constrained by "our" time. Therefore, God, by definition, is in a constant > state of being everywhere (past, present, and future) at once. Because God > exists in the future (as well as everywhere else), it stands to reason that > there must be a future out there for Him to exist in. Therefore, God must > have created the entire lifetime of the universe at the moment of creation. > 2. If you accept the model set forth in step #1 (the entire lifetime of the > universe already exists), then you must accept that all of our individual > destinies are preordained by God. That is, we do not have free will. [David] 1. Firstly, the statements in themselves cheat. Examples: a) "..created entire lifetime of the universe at the moment of creation" b) "..entire lifetime of the universe already exists" See? What does it mean that the entire lifetime of the universe already exists? Reworded, "the future already exists." Do you mean it exists *now*? The future doesn't exist *now*, it exists in the future. David, I think part of your problem is that you may be confusing God's time with our time. The two are not at all related. The entire lifetime of the universe already exists in God's time, but for us the future doesn't seem to exist yet. *Now* is a difficult word to apply to God, since it was invented and refers to being "inside" of time. Our past, present, and future are all part of God's infinite Now. God does not exist in the "future". He exists. Exactly my point! The entire lifetime of the universe is part of God's infinite "Now." He exists in our past, present, and future. Our future is part of God's Now; therefore, He has already created our future for us. He is even making me write this at this very moment! :-) Of course, the point I'm trying to make is that trying to prove Jon's point by "reaching outside of time", so to speak, is doomed to failure, because such questions are simply unaddressable. What was God doing before time began? The questioner is cheating; he has to reach back into time to phrase his question (as evidenced by the word "before"). If you disagree, keep the original question in mind and answer "When was the moment of creation?" This is yet another trick question, yet is the substance on which Jon's argument is founded. This is not really so difficult as you make out. The moment of creation is the beginning of our time, but is also an event in God's time that is totally unrelated to our time. Therefore, it may not seem reasonable for us to speak in terms such as "before creation" because in our time there is no such thing. However, in God's view (which is, I'm sure you'll agree, the ONLY accurate view) there is a point at which our time began and even a "period" before our time began. 2. This is going to sound like my old argument. You may assume, for the moment, that God does not exist. Does the concept of being "outside" time have any meaning? If so, then (by your argument) none of us have free will, since the future "already exists." Wrong. By my argument, if no God exists, then we have free will even though there is such a thing as being "outside of time." The reason we don't have free will (if an omniscient creator exists) is because God must have instantaneously created the entire lifetime of the universe with perfect foreknowledge. The omniscience/free will contradiction still stands. Merely repeating over and over that this issue is "unaddressable" does not resolve the contradiction. David, do you care to try to attack these two points again, or would you prefer to have a shot at the three that you didn't mention? Jon White [decvax|ucbvax]!tektronix!tekmdp!azure!jonw