are omniscience and free will compatable

Started by Milleby, January 25, 2015, 05:32:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

stromboli

a.  If God knows everything, we have no free will - and he lies when he tells us that we have it
b. If we have free will, God does not know everything - he is not God

Every action we take, no matter how errant it seems to us, is accounted for and predicted. We can't possibly have free will if there is no unaccounted variable.

http://www.godwouldbeanatheist.com/2problem/208omni.htm


the_antithesis

Quote from: Milleby on January 25, 2015, 06:20:20 PM
Well, I'm wondering if these two qualities create a paradox. You see, it seems to me that if a being has omniscience, that that would entail that they know all of the actions they will take in the future which would imply that they are subject to fate, which would in turn mean that they cannot have free will.

I prefer the usual argument of free will being the reason why god doesn't provide evidence for it's existence because that would interfere with our free will.

That is, if god gave us evidence for its existence, we would have no choice but to believe.

But by not providing evidence, we have no choice but to not believe.

Either way, god interferes with free will. So the issue is stupid.

Jason78

Quote from: Milleby on January 25, 2015, 05:32:20 PM
Is it possible for god (or any being) to have free will AND omniscience.

No.  Because omniscience isn't possible.

Quote from: Milleby on January 25, 2015, 05:32:20 PM
Do these two qualities create a paradox?
No.  Because the second quality is a nonsense.
Winner of WitchSabrinas Best Advice Award 2012


We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real
tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. -Plato

bennyboy

#18
What does "free will" mean?  The ability to act randomly without regard to your circumstances, so that you send shockwaves through causality?  If this is what free will means, then I can become free only by adhering to the decisions of a Magic 8-ball.

I think free will means the capacity for one's actions to express one's nature in response to one's circumstances.  So if I'm a prick, I get to freely honk my horn all I want, even when the guy in front of me is clearly waiting for a pedestrian to cross.  Now, that doesn't mean that given my brain chemistry at that moment, there was a philosophical possibility that I might not honk my horn.  That's because as one person, I have one nature, and so a full expression of that nature given circumstances X must be Y.

In other words, free will just means you get to act like what you are, not that you are magically free from the flow of causality through time.  So in, for example, God's case, God might know all that there is to know, and act according to His nature-- as He already knew He would.
Insanity is the only sensible response to the universe.  The sane are just making stuff up.

hrdlr110

Quote from: Milleby on January 25, 2015, 05:32:20 PM
Is it possible for god (or any being) to have free will AND omniscience. Do these two qualities create a paradox?

Omniscience is incompatible with freewill and prayer. Short. Sweet. End of story.
Q for theists; how can there be freewill and miracles? And, how can prayer exist in an environment as regimented as "gods plan"?

"I'm a polyatheist, there are many gods I don't believe in." - Dan Fouts

Aroura33

IMHO, Free Will isn't compatible with reality for any being, so the rest of the question becomes moot.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory.  LLAP"
Leonard Nimoy

Aroura33

Quote from: bennyboy on April 09, 2015, 12:55:27 AM
What does "free will" mean?  The ability to act randomly without regard to your circumstances, so that you send shockwaves through causality?  If this is what free will means, then I can become free only by adhering to the decisions of a Magic 8-ball.

I think free will means the capacity for one's actions to express one's nature in response to one's circumstances.  So if I'm a prick, I get to freely honk my horn all I want, even when the guy in front of me is clearly waiting for a pedestrian to cross.  Now, that doesn't mean that given my brain chemistry at that moment, there was a philosophical possibility that I might not honk my horn.  That's because as one person, I have one nature, and so a full expression of that nature given circumstances X must be Y.

In other words, free will just means you get to act like what you are, not that you are magically free from the flow of causality through time.  So in, for example, God's case, God might know all that there is to know, and act according to His nature-- as He already knew He would.
I kind of agree (I understand you are using the compatabalist term for free will here), but I hate redefining the term to mean, basically, NOT free at all but simply "free" to do what you were already bound to do anyway.  That is such a distortion of what most people mean when they say it, and it basically changes the term to mean the opposite of liberalist free will.  Compatabalists are just redefining free will to mean determined, basically, and then claiming free will exists.  It makes no sense to me no matter now much I learn about it, and I've tried hard to educate myself on this topic.

The universe is deterministic, free will is an illusion that was necessary from an evolutionary standpoint in order to make sense of the world around us. Our brains create tons and tons of illusions every day to help us function.  That's basically what it boils down to, I think.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory.  LLAP"
Leonard Nimoy

Unbeliever

#22
Quote from: Milleby on January 25, 2015, 05:32:20 PM
Is it possible for god (or any being) to have free will AND omniscience. Do these two qualities create a paradox?

Hi Milleby!

I've had this pointed out to me before, at Incompatible Properties Arguments - A Survey - Theodore Drange. (look at number 9)

It would depend on the extent of omniscience of the deity in question, so that possible loopholes in the argument could be used to sidestep the paradox. As with any politician "what did he know and when did he know it" is one way to spin the thing. But if said god is considered to be absolutely omniscient, then its foreknowledge of its future actions should indeed cancel any notion of freedom that could apply to it.

Such a god could not exist, and so does not exist.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

trdsf

Ugh.  The 'free will' debate always triggers my "See, this is why I hate philosophy" reaction, even though I don't really hate philosophy.

Within the limits set by physical reality, civil society, and my own psychological limitations, I have sufficient free will to be satisfied that I am a free-willed being.  If there is an omniscient entity directing everything, it would have to be of such an order of complexity that a) we couldn't begin to understand the least part of it and b) would have to be so invasively everywhere that it should be impossible not to detect.

And if this is all a VR simulation, I wanna have a word with the programmer.  Several words, actually.  Many of them four-lettered.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total, and I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution." -- Barbara Jordan

Munch

There is no such thing as omniscience, it's a convenience created by religious minded to use to make their sky daddy seem all powerful and watchful. Even the highest level of computer surveillance by governments isn't omniscient, since people work ways around such things.
'Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners' - George Carlin

Mike Cl

Free will is one of those things that has to be fairly well defined if two people are going to have a meaningful discussion about it.  For me it simply means that I am able to make a fairly large range of decisions on my own.  I fully understand that the chemical makeup of my body figures deeply into what decisions I can really make on my own.  And the wiring of my brain puts similar constraints on my decision making as well. But within those confines--plus the social and cultural society I find myself operating in also puts confines on those decisions.  Still, I can choose from a wide range of decisions to make, especially about my attitude about things.  And what my attitude is has a huge bearing on how I view a subject and how I feel about a subject.  So, yeah, I do have free will.  Sort of. :)
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

SGOS

Quote from: Mike Cl on April 09, 2015, 08:25:28 PM
Free will is one of those things that has to be fairly well defined if two people are going to have a meaningful discussion about it.  For me it simply means that I am able to make a fairly large range of decisions on my own.  I fully understand that the chemical makeup of my body figures deeply into what decisions I can really make on my own.  And the wiring of my brain puts similar constraints on my decision making as well. But within those confines--plus the social and cultural society I find myself operating in also puts confines on those decisions.  Still, I can choose from a wide range of decisions to make, especially about my attitude about things.  And what my attitude is has a huge bearing on how I view a subject and how I feel about a subject.  So, yeah, I do have free will.  Sort of. :)
I agree with all of this.  The definition of free will can be tweaked to support one position or the other.  Frankly, I easily get lost in the debate (as in, "What are these people talking about?")  I mean lost to the point where it becomes incomprehensible.  I keep wondering what's going over my head?  Since I don't understand it, I just ignore it, throw out reasoning, and say to myself, "If I can choose chocolate ice cream, even though I prefer vanilla, then I've got free will."  I may not be able to play basketball for the Lakers, but I can still send in a letter of application.

At that point, someone says, "Well that's not we mean by free will," but then I just put my hands over my ears and start shouting gibberish really loud.

Mike Cl

Quote from: SGOS on April 09, 2015, 08:51:32 PM
I agree with all of this.  The definition of free will can be tweaked to support one position or the other.  Frankly, I easily get lost in the debate (as in, "What are these people talking about?")  I mean lost to the point where it becomes incomprehensible.  I keep wondering what's going over my head?  Since I don't understand it, I just ignore it, throw out reasoning, and say to myself, "If I can choose chocolate ice cream, even though I prefer vanilla, then I've got free will."  I may not be able to play basketball for the Lakers, but I can still send in a letter of application.

At that point, someone says, "Well that's not we mean by free will," but then I just put my hands over my ears and start shouting gibberish really loud.
You and I are on the same page here.  Especially about the ice cream! And I've learned that there are no bad choices in ice cream--some just better than others and that can and does change from time to time.  And as long as I'm free to choose when and what kind of ice cream, then I have free will. 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?