• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I just want to sin!!!

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
It's news to me. I have never known a time when somebody would not be held responsible for killing somebody by dangerous driving.
For me, I see such laws as totally reasonable, and imply free-will of the nature that I refer to.

In some situations, the responsibility is negated because it is seen as an 'act of God'. Historically, the responsibility could be placed on the parents (for example), or on the family, or on a larger community.


People have been driving for a very short period of time. The notion of personal responsibility is actually a fairly recent one and is far from universal even today.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Yes you can choose differently, in such case God would have different knowledge. Aging, how does God´s knowledge magically affect your ability to make choices?
In the hypothetical where your god exists:
God knows what I am going to eat for lunch today.
God can tell me what I am going to eat for lunch today.

If I have free will I can choose to eat something contrary to God's knowledge, in which case God is not omniscient.
If I cannot choose to eat something contrary to God's knowledge, then I have no free will.
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
wa


His knowledge affects whether the choice was free or not. if there is prior knowledge, then the choice was pre-determined, which means it wasn't free.
what if the deity forgot about his prior knowledge? Yesterday he knew about your future choices, but today he simply forgot (he has bad memory) does this restore the possibility of free choices?
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
By this definition, who is driving a car down the road?
If a person wants to brake, he pushes the brake pedal .. who is responsible for that?

Are you trying to tell us that G-d is telling the driver to push the brake, just because He knows that you will?

Responsible as in having a free choice to do it or not? Or responsible in the legal sense?

If the choice to push the brake pedal was determined prior to the person making the decision, who has responsibility? Maybe God has the responsibility for making the universe that way.

I am not saying that God forced a decision (although that may also be the case). But I am saying that if God knew the decision before it was made, then the decision was not 'free': it was determined.

Now, God could decide (under your system) to hold someone responsible that didn't make a free decision. Supposedly that is God's choice. But if God knew the choice ahead of time, no other choice could have been made.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
It´s not a claim, it´s question that would help me understand your views.

1 Today a deity knows what you will have for diner next sundey / you will pick hamburgers rather than hotdogs.


2 Tomorrow this deity forgets about his previous knowledge (he no longer knows what you will choose)

Does the possibility of freely choosing hamburgers rather than hotdogs restores the possibility of free choices? (due to the fact that the deity forgot about his knowledge)

I would say not. The fact that the choice was pre-determined is what negates the freeness of the choice. The knowledge implies that the choice was determined, but is not equivalent to it.

again this is not a claim is a question on your personal views.


an other example
A deity knows what are you going to do from 0:00 am to 10:59pm……(for some reason this deity doesn’t know about stuff happening from 11:00pm to 11:59pm)…….does this means that you can freely choose your diner at 11:00pm? But you are not free at 10:00pm?

What is your view on that?

Given that information, it is possible that I could be free to choose dinner at 11:00, but there is not enough evidence to establish this (it could also be possible that I am not free to do so). Whether the choice of dinner is free at 11:00 depends on whether it is determined at that point. Knowledge of the outcome shows the result is determined, but it may be determined in other ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ppp

leroy

Well-Known Member
I The knowledge implies that the choice was determined, but is not equivalent to it.

.
Knowledge could imply that you know that person and under that basis you know what option is he going to pick.

In other words I don’t see why knowledge necessarily implies determinism
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
If there is prior knowledge of what will be chosen, then the choice is determined, not free.
Does knowing the outcome of a random event (like in quantum physics) implies necessarily that the event is not random? Or is this rule only applicable with free will?
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
If there is prior knowledge of what will be chosen, then the choice is determined, not free.
So if there is knowledge with high degree of certainty, choices could be free. But if knowledge is 100% certain the possibility of free choice disappears……………. Is this what you are claiming?
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
Responsible as in having a free choice to do it or not? Or responsible in the legal sense?
Both, or are you telling me that the law is stupid?

I am not saying that God forced a decision (although that may also be the case). But I am saying that if God knew the decision before it was made, then the decision was not 'free': it was determined.
No, you said "I am saying that 'wanting' it was also determined. And that means the choice was not free."

..so in other words, you are saying it doesn't matter whether we want to do something or not. A person who makes an apparently free choice is not really making one.

I can't agree with that sort of definition of free-will. It is pie in the sky. It doesn't bear any resemblance to reality.
I agree with the legal definition .. we are responsible for our actions, regardless of what G-d knows or doesn't know.
If somebody chooses to do something because they want to, that is considered free-will by the legal profession
 
Last edited:

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
In other words I don’t see why knowledge necessarily implies determinism
It's all about definitions, it would appear.

If we say that a known future is determined, that must be true.
It is determined whether it was known or not.
The big question is what determines it?

Is it our choices? I would say yes. It doesn't matter whether they are known or not.

As you say .. if somebody knows what happens tomorrow through some mechanism that we can't fully understand, it changes nothing. The person might not even have told a soul.
..but some people just like to show that it is impossible to know the future [and be responsible for our actions], hence G-d is not real. :D
 
Last edited:

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Does knowing the outcome of a random event (like in quantum physics) implies necessarily that the event is not random? Or is this rule only applicable with free will?

If you know ahead of time what the outcome is, then it is pre-determined and hence is not truly random.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ppp

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Knowledge could imply that you know that person and under that basis you know what option is he going to pick.

In other words I don’t see why knowledge necessarily implies determinism

That it is possible to know such ahead of time shows that it is not free.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
So if there is knowledge with high degree of certainty, choices could be free. But if knowledge is 100% certain the possibility of free choice disappears……………. Is this what you are claiming?

If the probability is 99.99%, then the freedom is small, but there. At least potentially.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Both, or are you telling me that the law is stupid?


No, you said "I am saying that 'wanting' it was also determined. And that means the choice was not free."

..so in other words, you are saying it doesn't matter whether we want to do something or not. A person who makes an apparently free choice is not really making one.

Yes, in the case that *knowledge* is possible prior to the choice, then the freedom of choice is illusory.

If it was determined that you would want that, then the choice was not free.

I can't agree with that sort of definition of free-will. It is pie in the sky. It doesn't bear any resemblance to reality.
I agree with the legal definition .. we are responsible for our actions, regardless of what G-d knows or doesn't know.
If somebody chooses to do something because they want to, that is considered free-will by the legal profession

Correct. But that is not the philosophical problem of free will. And it opens up the issue of whether someone *should* be responsible for choices they could not have made any other way because they were pre-determined.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ppp

leroy

Well-Known Member
Is it our choices? I would say yes. It doesn't matter whether they are known or not.

agree
..but some people just like to show that it is impossible to know the future [and be responsible for our actions], hence G-d is not real. :D
No at most they would refute the specific attribute of “God being all knowing”……… we already agree that God cant do stuff that is logically incoherent……….. so even if atheist show that there is real logical contradiction between knowledge and free will they would simply refute 1 atribute.


In my opinion if a “non-all knowing” God exists and if Jesus resurrected Christianity would still be true............and the same applies to other religions.
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
If the probability is 99.99%, then the freedom is small, but there. At least potentially.
I don’t see how that follows, if my wife chooses strawberries rather than apples 99.99% present of the time this statistic will let me infer that there is a 99.99% probability that she will choose strawberries.

If the statistic where 50% / 50% I would only have a degree of confidence of 50%

But how does my knowledge on this statistic affect her ability to freely choose between these 2 options?
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Well it’s like this. I think you are on the right path. Question! Question! Question! Been there done that. Eventually found the truth, but really it found me as I wasn’t searching for God or a new religion. I was vehemently opposed to God and religion. Yet now I would offer up my life for any religion or any Messenger - Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, Krishna, Baha’u’llah etc why? What happened in between not searching and being opposed to both God and religion?

If I could put it into words I would but I can’t. There’s just no language to describe to you what happened. How I reached a state of certitude of knowing God exists and recognising His latest Messenger, Baha’u’llah. There are just things which cannot be explained with words and this is one of them.

How great the multitude of truths which the garment of words can never contain!

Only heart to heart can speak the bliss of mystic knowers;
No messenger can tell it and no missive bear it.

I am silent from weakness on many a matter,
For my words could not reckon them and my speech would fall short.

(Baha’u’llah)

Interesting, but I don't like absolutes, even the most well evidenced objective facts would have to be tentative and open to revision in the light of new evidence. I think that absolute certainty or truth is epistemologically impossible.
 
Top