Would foreknowledge contradict free will?

[Super Universe]

Essentially, for humans, the future cannot change because it has already happened. If you were to learn about the future and then perform some action or non-action then it would be in accordance with what already happened on the original timeline.

Now, it is possible to develop technology that allows beings to go back in time to specific intervention points and view the past but they cannot affect any change. They can only view it as it happened.

Souls can, however, access the original timeline and change things. This creates a new timeline while the original timeline remains unchanged.

If, somehow, beings developed the technology that allowed them to not only view the original timeline but also affect change in it, well, they would immediately get the attention of some extremely powerful beings who would certainly intervene.

 

[Wandered Off]

If you foretold that your friend was going to be involved in a car accident when you lended him your car - would you say "oh well thats the future, what will be will be?" or will you not lend him your car, therefore changing the future by your own free will. So if foreknowledge did exist I think we would still have free will also!

Well, what you're talking about isn't really knowledge of "the future", but only of a possible and avoidable future that you can alter. That's not foreknowledge in the sense I think many believers present it. It's "knowledge" of what might or might not happen, which is not the same as the future.

If you look at the concept of predestination, some believers claim that God has a particular ending already chosen for your life, which would mean you couldn't change it. That is what would be incompatible with free will, not some potential future you could alter.

Besides, how would you know which possible future you foresaw? What if I foresaw it and altered it after you thought you were done adjusting your behavior? I think there's too much complexity here, but it's an interesting thought.

 

[Panda]

Now, it is possible to develop technology that allows beings to go back in time to specific intervention points and view the past but they cannot affect any change. They can only view it as it happened.

Souls can, however, access the original timeline and change things. This creates a new timeline while the original timeline remains unchanged.

If, somehow, beings developed the technology that allowed them to not only view the original timeline but also affect change in it, well, they would immediately get the attention of some extremely powerful beings who would certainly intervene.

And do you have any proof of it being possible to go back in time? I thought scientists thought it was impossible to go back in time because of Chaos Theroy is it? I know traveling forward in time is possible and if you've ever been on a plane then you have traveled forward in time due to less gravity the further you are from the centre of the Earth.

Here is the problem though. I you "see" forward in time and you change it then you didn't see the future because it didn't happen. However if you see into the future try to change it but can't then it proves we have no free will and the future is pre-determined.
I think the real problem is telling how you could see into the future and for it to actually be that and not just a lucky guess. Of course if it was possible it would be a remarkable thing to study.

 

[lew0049]

Personally, I have come to the conclusion that issues such as these are not very important. Although I definitely see the logic behind the thread as I have thought about questions like these mannnnnny times, it seems apparent to me that some things the creation is not supposed too or incapable of understanding. However, I feel as though God puts man in a position to make choices. These choices give man free will. Like someone said before - the fork in the road analogy. Regardless though, it doesn't seem at all possible for the creation to understand the choices/reasoning/motives of that of the creator. If that was truly possible, then He would not be so much greater/better in every way than the creation. For example, mankind sees things in 3 demisionally, but how could our minds comphrehend something that saw 1000 demisionally.

 

[Bronze]

Way out left, man, very very far left.

In brief, choice is the variable that unifies all predicted futures. God knows all the possibilities and outcomes of those possibilities, but not what choice you will make to arrive @ them.

It's like a junction which forks out into many roads and paths: GOD knows where all roads lead but not which one you'll take.

how could god know the absolute future, but not which choices we will make when that is part of the future.

i agree very much with poster of this thread, and it makes no sense to say he would only know the possibilities, there is only possibility, choice is an illusion, want to know why? because the fact that our bodies are made of matter, and matter always obeys the laws of physics, making us nothing more than complicated formulas, with one answer (possibility)

choice is an illusion, its like a book, just because you dont know the ending doesnt mean there are multiple possible endings, there is only one, and the author (god) wrote that ending long before we read it

 

[Alex_G]

Humans live in the present, and the present only. You can only cause change in the present time, its exact definition being another thing, i like to imagine it as the the shortest unit of time reccognisable by the human brain. We have however developed the ability to retain information from the past through memories, where by they continue to exist in the alternate reality of ideas as Plato noted. We also have the ability to use these memories to anticipate events in the future dimention of time. So from a natural human perpective we see time from the present, able to almost look both ways across a road of time, viewing the traffic. If time travel were possible, then theoreticaly you take the 'present' with you, and subsequently the ability to cause change.

But basically free will in this sense is the description of humans in the presaent time. Free will doesnt effectivly exist in the past and future from the perspective of the present.

Of course as an example one could theoretically travel to the future by means of say leaving Earth, and return after experiencing different time elsewhere in space (space time continuum). In this sense its all reletive between people, but still its only the present you experience and can change.

 

[tkdrocks]

Let's put it this way. You are walking down the street and you witness a guy slip on a Banana. Five minutes later, when you look back in the past, you know he slipped on the Banana, right? But your knowledge of that did not cause him to slip on the Banana. Likewise, God's knowledge of the choices we make in the future does not cause us to make those choices.

We need to modify your analogy a bit here. Not only did God create the banana, but he put it in everyone's way intentionally for them to slip on. As a matter of fact, the whole road is paved in those bananas with a very slim path of avoidance. So, God's knowledge holds full accountability.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

How about this: Say the Father is bestows personality but is not the author of the physical body. If a farseeing human being can forecast the decision of a younger associate accurately, why can't God forecast the decisions of the physical entity? And how does such foreknowledge take away from the freedom of that entity?

 

[astarath]

I've always appreaciated the visual concept displayed in Donnie Darko. The concept that there is a predetermined path on which we all travel. The beginning and end are routed. Even the critical points of our lives the intersections if you will are predetermined. However the actions you take as you walk this path are yours to decide. Therefore where you end up is not yours to decide but who you are and what you do on the way are in your control.

 

[Wandered Off]

How about this: Say the Father is bestows personality but is not the author of the physical body. If a farseeing human being can forecast the decision of a younger associate accurately, why can't God forecast the decisions of the physical entity? And how does such foreknowledge take away from the freedom of that entity?

It depends. Is the "forecast" speculation or actual knowledge? The scenario works for me if it's a good guess but has a possibility of being wrong. If, on the other hand, it's actual knowledge, that means the physical entity is incapable of doing other than what is already known - which is contrary to free will.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

It depends. Is the "forecast" speculation or actual knowledge? The scenario works for me if it's a good guess but has a possibility of being wrong. If, on the other hand, it's actual knowledge, that means the physical entity is incapable of doing other than what is already known - which is contrary to free will.

The scenario is more than a "good guess" because it's perfection making the forecast, but less than predetermined certainty. Even so, how does God's pre-knowledge of something that is not his doing prevent the finite creature's choosing? It does not say that the creature is incapable of doing something else, it's only knowing he won't.

 

[Willamena]

Even so, how does God's pre-knowledge of something that is not his doing prevent the finite creature's choosing? It does not say that the creature is incapable of doing something else, it's only knowing he won't.

Because "knowledge" is of certain things, certain for us because they have passed.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Because "knowledge" is of certain things, certain for us because they have passed.

Even so, how does that prevent the finite creature's choosing? It does not say that the creature is incapable of doing something else, it's only knowing he won't.

 

[Wandered Off]

It does not say that the creature is incapable of doing something else, it's only knowing he won't.

The creature is in fact incapable of doing something else, because the outcome pre-exists the action, as evidenced by the fact that it can be foreknown.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

The creature is in fact incapable of doing something else, because the outcome pre-exists the action, as evidenced by the fact that it can be foreknown.

Why? Why does my knowing what my son will do in a given circumstance prevent him from doing something different?

 

[Wandered Off]

Why? Why does my knowing what my son will do in a given circumstance prevent him from doing something different?

You don't know with 100% certainty. You only predict based on prior experience. That's "foreguessing", which does not imply the pre-existence of a fixed outcome, therefore no interference with freedom of will.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

You don't know with 100% certainty. You only predict based on prior experience. That's "foreguessing", which does not imply the pre-existence of a fixed outcome, therefore no interference with freedom of will.

What's the connection? What's the causative effect?

 

[Wandered Off]

I assume you're asking about foreknowledge as a 'causative effect'. That's not my position, though. Here's what I said in the OP about that:

I’m not saying necessarily that foreknowledge is the cause of the future. Instead, the fact that foreknowledge is possible only means that the future must already exist somewhere. It is the existence of a future, not the foreknowledge, that seems to contradict free will. The knowledge is a by-product or effect of a fixed outcome, not the other way around. If the outcome can be known, it necessarily exists. That someone could become aware of this is incidental. The choice is fixed and cannot be changed.

 

[AK4]

You don't know with 100% certainty. You only predict based on prior experience. That's "foreguessing", which does not imply the pre-existence of a fixed outcome, therefore no interference with freedom of will.

LOL,

"foreguessing":yes: thats exactly right

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Sorry, but that doesn't answer the question: why does knowing what a person will do prevent him from freely choosing? It may be "fixed" from the knower's point of view, but that doesn't make the chooser any less free.