The Problem of Foreknowledge

[Dirty Penguin]

So in light of "God's" foreknowledge...does it mean there is no free will but in stead predestination?

Personally that's the way I see their god...this (omniscient/omnipotent)

Bible (paraphrased)
No man knows the day and hour except the father.

Quran (paraphrased)
It is he who hears all and knows all.

 

[idav]

So in light of "God's" foreknowledge...does it mean there is no free will but in stead predestination?

Personally that's the way I see their god...this (omniscient/omnipotent)

Bible (paraphrased)
No man knows the day and hour except the father.

Quran (paraphrased)
It is he who hears all and knows all.

With predetermination God is calvinist. From the beginning of time he picks the elite and picks who will suffer an ill fate. Problem there is that god loses his own free will as well or is he still omnipotent?

 

[blackout]

This God knows the whole/entire story in advance
up through the curtain call
and then writes the final end(ings) himself.

(in terms of wages paid for each role played)

He's just cranky because his Being is incapable
of experiencing suspense, or surprise endings and the like.

 

[muhammad_isa]

It is me braking, but not because I choose to do so. There's no such a thing as choosing. It's an illusion. I do what I do because of the number of cause/effects that lead up to specific moments in time. Just like you do.

Hmm .. so you don't choose when to go to bed .. you don't choose when to eat .. you don't choose whether to move your arm etc.

..seems to me, any rational thinking person would consider that viewpoint as irresponsible..

You: "Sorry judge, I didn't choose to violently assault that person"
Judge: "Well who did then?"
You: "Nobody really, that's just how it is"

 

[9Westy9]

With predetermination God is calvinist. From the beginning of time he picks the elite and picks who will suffer an ill fate. Problem there is that god loses his own free will as well or is he still omnipotent?

It means God is forced to do what he knows will happen. He can't change it therefore restricting his omnipotence.

 

[Friend of Bill W]

Hmm .. so you don't choose when to go to bed .. you don't choose when to eat .. you don't choose whether to move your arm etc.

..seems to me, any rational thinking person would consider that viewpoint as irresponsible..

You: "Sorry judge, I didn't choose to violently assault that person"
Judge: "Well who did then?"
You: "Nobody really, that's just how it is"

Read up on the Warrior Gene and how a death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment because it was shown, due to the murderers GENETICS, that he had less free will because of his genetic make up.

This has been tested in a court of law in the US.

Free will is not totally free. Conditional will is a more accurate phrase.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Hmm .. so you don't choose when to go to bed .. you don't choose when to eat .. you don't choose whether to move your arm etc.

..seems to me, any rational thinking person would consider that viewpoint as irresponsible..

You: "Sorry judge, I didn't choose to violently assault that person"
Judge: "Well who did then?"
You: "Nobody really, that's just how it is"

We would lock up earthquakes and tornadoes if we could. Your point?

 

[Skwim]

Hmm .. so you don't choose when to go to bed .. you don't choose when to eat .. you don't choose whether to move your arm etc.

..seems to me, any rational thinking person would consider that viewpoint as irresponsible..

Whereas it seems to me that any rational thinking person would consider the argument for determinism and recognize that I'm right.

You: "Sorry judge, I didn't choose to violently assault that person"
Judge: "Well who did then?"
You: "Nobody really, that's just how it is"

You misunderstand.

Me: "Sorry judge, I didn't choose to violently assault that person"
Dumb Judge: "Well who did then?" (Dumb because I never said I didn't do it.)
Me: "I did, but I had no choice in the matter. I was fated to do it."​

 

[Falvlun]

We're talking about god's foreknowledge: what he knows of the future; therefore, it isn't a matter of "what you did," but of what you're going to do." The question then being, does this foreknowledge of god's determine whether or X and not Y happens? I say No.

Well, I think it is a matter of what you did. It's just a different way of looking at it. He knows the "future" because that is what happened.

Sorry, but no. As I've said elsewhere, you only get to do what you do because of all the causal determinants that led up to that doing.

The only problem I see with foreknowledge is regarding it as the determinant of the future. But you are correct in that I believe freewill can't exist regardless of whether God is omniscient or not.

You mean if what we do is completely and utterly random in nature? No. Free will would be a bankrupt notion because the will (whatever it may be) would be at the mercy of random processes.

I am not making an absolute "freewill exists" statement here. I am creating a hypothetical situation, in order to isolate the effects of a specific component-- God's omniscience.

 

[Skwim]

Well, I think it is a matter of what you did. It's just a different way of looking at it. He knows the "future" because that is what happened.

I assume that putting "future" in quotation marks means that it isn't really the future but something else. Just to be clear, my use of future refers to a point in time yet to come. For instance, today is January 25, 2012, and August 4, 2013 is in the future. If this doesn't agree with your use of "future" than an explanation would be nice.

I am not making an absolute "freewill exists" statement here. I am creating a hypothetical situation, in order to isolate the effects of a specific component-- God's omniscience.

Okay, and to reiterate, I don't believe god's omniscience would have any effect on what happens in the future.

 

[idav]

Okay, and to reiterate, I don't believe god's omniscience would have any effect on what happens in the future.

It certainly would be different if God didn't know all possible future events. IOW whether you know the future or are flying blind makes a difference on future events

 

[Willamena]

I assume that putting "future" in quotation marks means that it isn't really the future but something else. Just to be clear, my use of future refers to a point in time yet to come. For instance, today is January 25, 2012, and August 4, 2013 is in the future. If this doesn't agree with your use of "future" than an explanation would be nice.

Okay, and to reiterate, I don't believe god's omniscience would have any effect on what happens in the future.

I think Falvlun's just refering to god's omnipresence, which places god everywhere and everywhen.

 

[Skwim]

It certainly would be different if God didn't know all possible future events.

Why and how?

IOW whether you know the future or are flying blind makes a difference on future events

Right, but we're talking about god here, not us.

 

[idav]

I think Falvlun's just refering to god's omnipresence, which places god everywhere and everywhen.

The idea that gods omniscience means being able to calculate all future events is a bit far-fetched. I'm more comfortable with an omnipresence version of knowing all now events.

 

[idav]

Why and how?

Right, but we're talking about god here, not us.

Well we can be reasonable about how much power this god actually has. If god is supposed to know all future events since the beginning then it means existence emerged from a sort of default super intelligence which doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[Willamena]

The idea that gods omniscience means being able to calculate all future events is a bit far-fetched. I'm more comfortable with an omnipresence version of knowing all now events.

You pantheist, you.

I see the OP as suggesting a future that is composed entirely of propositions of prediction, and not in any way actual. The implications of that for everywhere/everywhen could very well be only here and now.

 

[idav]

You pantheist, you.

I see the OP as suggesting a future that is composed entirely of propositions of prediction, and not in any way actual. The implications of that for everywhere/everywhen could very well be only here and now.

This makes sense. In my view, being "all knowing" is different than using the what we know 'now' in order to predict what could be. If there is multiple possibilities then the future is an unknown until acted upon in a certain way to cause a determinant course that could actually be known.

 

[Skwim]

Well we can be reasonable about how much power this god actually has. If god is supposed to know all future events since the beginning then it means existence emerged from a sort of default super intelligence which doesn't make much sense to me.

Me either, but this is the kind of conclusion one can derive from Christian assertions. It's their faith and their claims, and to be coherent this is what sometimes emerges: strange and often contradictory outcomes.

 

[idav]

Me either, but this is the kind of conclusion one can derive from Christian assertions. It's their faith and their claims, and to be coherent this is what sometimes emerges: strange and often contradictory outcomes.

I don't think such a being would have free will let alone be able give it's creation any freewill. Either omnipotence or omniscience has to give a little.

 

[Shades-o-Blue]

(a.k.a. Beating a Dead Horse)

The problem of God's foreknowledge vs. Man's free will was dealt with by past philosophers by specifying the distinction between knowledge and prediction in regards to truth, and holding that foreknowledge, even God's, is prediction.


Do you agree with this assessment? Why or why not?

I believe God is all seeing and all knowing, but what if we were put here to find out for ourselves where we will finally end up?