Reconciling Faith in God and Acceptance of Science

[lilithu]

That is really not what I intended. And that is a really good point. I have thought about it most of the day and I have sat here and typed and retyped several responses but I can't seem to come up with a good answer. You have raised a very good point and I have no good answer at this time. I must continue to think on this.

Runlikethewind, are you familiar with process theology?

 

[Runlikethewind]

Socrates believed that absolute knowledge would impinge upon free will. That is, one could only choose to do what is wrong if one is not fully aware of the consequences. Whereas if one knew the full consequences would would not be able to do anything other than what is right.

Very nice! Do you recall where Socrates said this? Given that Socrates is not known to have written anything it must be in one of Plato's dialouges, do your know which? You said so nicely and so concisely what I could not say at all. Thanks!

 

[lilithu]

Very nice! Do you recall where Socrates said this? Given that Socrates is not known to have written anything it must be in one of Plato's dialouges, do your know which? You said so nicely and so concisely what I could not say at all. Thanks!

I learned it as the Socratic Paradox, and on further reflection, it seems to deny free will altogether. Socrates states that no one can do wrong if fully knowledgeable of "virtue." But otoh, if someone does wrong, it's because he or she was ignorant of virtue. Which leads to Wandered Off's objection, how can it be free will if one is not making an informed decision?

Anyway, upon googleage, I think it's mentioned in Plato's play, Protagoras.

 

[Runlikethewind]

Runlikethewind, are you familiar with process theology?

No, but thanks for pointing it out I'll look into it. I flipped through the wiki article, looks interesting.

I learned it as the Socratic Paradox, and on further reflection, it seems to deny free will altogether. Socrates states that no one can do wrong if fully knowledgeable of "virtue." But otoh, if someone does wrong, it's because he or she was ignorant of virtue. Which leads to Wandered Off's objection, how can it be free will if one is not making an informed decision?

Anyway, upon googleage, I think it's mentioned in Plato's play, Protagoras.

Right, excellent. I was flipping through Protagoras and although I didn't find the specific argument/paradox (I didn't look that hard) I do see the connection there between virtue, knowledge, and free-will. Socrates talks about having full knowledge of virtue one would choose to be virtuous, however he also speaks about being influenced by passions. I wonder if full knowledge of virtue would in fact result in the use of free-will to always choose good. I wonder if even with full knowledge if our passions would, at times, be too strong to resist....

I think wandered off was right in his objection that our free-will is limited by not having full knowledge, maybe that is the point. Maybe God has limited our free-will intentionally by keeping us in the dark so that we can learn what it is and how to use it. Maybe the full exercise of free-will is like a loaded gun in the hands of a child. Maybe God has given us a gun to play with so we know what it is like but He has kept the bullets so we really can't hurt ourselves too bad.....or something. Bad analogy maybe? Perhaps keeping us in the dark and not giving us full knowledge is like training wheels for free-will. When we die the training wheels come off and we either ride free into eternity or crash and burn.

 

[lilithu]

I think wandered off was right in his objection that our free-will is limited by not having full knowledge, maybe that is the point. Maybe God has limited our free-will intentionally by keeping us in the dark so that we can learn what it is and how to use it. Maybe the full exercise of free-will is like a loaded gun in the hands of a child. Maybe God has given us a gun to play with so we know what it is like but He has kept the bullets so we really can't hurt ourselves too bad.....or something. Bad analogy maybe? Perhaps keeping us in the dark and not giving us full knowledge is like training wheels for free-will. When we die the training wheels come off and we either ride free into eternity or crash and burn.

I don't think that God intentionally limits us. (And yes, your analogy is frightening!) I think that's just the nature of existence. We are limited by virtue of our existing. As soon as something exists, it is by necessity, finite. It is one thing and not another. It is in one place and not another. (Unless it is an electron, that is. ) How can we finite beings possibly then have full knowledge on our own?

 

[Runlikethewind]

I don't think that God intentionally limits us. (And yes, your analogy is frightening!) I think that's just the nature of existence. We are limited by virtue of our existing.

This is exactly my point, we are limited by virtue of our existence.

As soon as something exists, it is by necessity, finite. It is one thing and not another. It is in one place and not another. (Unless it is an electron, that is. ) How can we finite beings possibly then have full knowledge on our own?

Perhaps full knowledge is a bit misleading but the point refers to our knowledge of God. I think that if we stood in the full presence of God there would no longer be any doubt as to His being. And so in this existence of ours, this life on earth, we are not given the full presence of God. After we die we will not be as finite, we will be in a fuller state of existence and a fuller presence of God, I believe. If true, the limits on our free-will are going to be less restrictive, because we have a fuller knowledge, and therefore we will be able to more fully realize and exercise the potential power of our freedom of will. And by way of our existence here we will be more ready, prepared, and capable of using it. That make any sense?