Free Will?

[water]

Staples is correct about our free will being limited. We do make choices but these choices are based on other influences.

We cannot but live somewhere, in some environment -- so, sure, we cannot be but "influenced". To say that in order to have full free will, we should not be influenced in any way is the same like saying we should live in a vacuum, or be gods. Which is a nonsensical demand.

People who went thru hell in a war experience terrible flashbacks or nightmares. For many, their free will cannot stop these intense flashbacks if the pain was too great at the time.

The major problem with understanding free will is that contents are ascribed to it that are extraneous to it.
What is limited are our knowledge and our abilities -- but this doesn't automatically mean that our free will is limited.

Some people cannot do something that is totally against their nature. Like killing their children. Nothing will convince them to ever do something like that. So their free will to do 'anything they can think of' won't work for this particular choice.

This is confused.

First of all, just because one can do something, does not mean that one must do it.

Secondly, it seems that you are proposing that in order to have free will, we should not have any values and preferences on which we act.

People who go insane have lost their free will to be rational.

How?
Are you suggesting that free will means to be able to do anything, and also do it?

And besides, if god tells us that it is in our nature (which he gave to us) to sin...and it is impossible NOT to sin...then our free will has been greatly compromised.

The corollarium of this is then that we would have free will, if there would be no us.
Will you say that our free will has been greatly compromised already by being born? (Something that happened without us having any influence over it.)

 

[mario]

water,

Yes you're right about preferences and morals...you still have free will to refuse or accept something. I was thinking more like "absolute" free will where behavior is involved. Our morals do put the brakes on it and for some people nothing will ever convince their free will to change...not even the devil. haha

Well no, it's not like it would have been better to have nothing in this universe. I'm just saying we are like we are and free will does exist to a point. But it's hard to philosophise about it in any abstract way.

 

[MarcAC]

When will this ever end? I think everyone needs to read Stephen King's The Dead Zone and/or watch The Dead Zone series on the USA network - maybe that will help.

 

[everneo]

Yes, but if He doesn't actively interfere, we would also be making the future with our own free-willed decisions. You say he can change the future with his free-will so why can't we?

To make future omnipotence is required. But, yes, if God does not actively interfere then our future will be made based on our action of our free-will.

"If he has own free-will there is no question of blindness. Aslo, he must be sure of something, like, human do not have free-will to go to Sun for vacation."

This is a bad example. I mean, to not know the future, He would have to not know exactly all of the details of everything He created, because if He creates them specifically in a certain way there is only one path each individual will take. So, He would have to not know this path and therefore not know everything about His creations.

Why there is only one path ? If there is only one path it is predetermined then. Free-will has any meaning only if there are more than one choice though God knows all the possible outcomes but not yet fixed any one but left it to the individual's choice.

'wait & see' game may be what he is upto."

He wouldn't have to wait and see if He already knew how His creations work and therefore what they would do.

Thats to say there is no free-will, every thing is predetermined. You are back to square 1. This was already discussed in previous pages.

---

The biggest problem with saying He doesn't know the future would be that in this case, the purpose of life is discounted, which makes the notion of God almost pointless.

Purpose may be to find out what humans with free-will do. We don't know what is in God's mind exactly. Theists, particulary of Abramic religions, say the purpose is to worship/follow God out of our own free-will. I am not sure.

Unless there is a God, and He doesn't know the purpose of life, but then there is no reason to speculate about God at all. If He doesn't know the future, how does He know what we're supposed to be able to do? He could have enough limited knowledge of us to know what we are capable of, but have created us slightly blindly so that He wouldn't know which paths we would choose. This seems like a ridiculously unnecessary complication.

What is the pupose of life from God's point of view? I don't know. You seem to have the notion that not knowing the future absolutely renders God blind or something. If he knows the future absolutely, he is capable of that, then he predetermined the future. If he does not know future of certain things absolutely, then he kept it that way by way of sharing the decision making (freewill) with humans. He has omnipotence and has his own free-will afterall to afford this uncertainity.

 

[okinrus]

God quite obviously hardened Pharoah's heart and then some years later provided a cop out justification for it through his patriarchal oracle. It also follows that Pharoah was condemned in advance.

God restricted from Pharoah the grace necessary for Pharoah to release the Israelites. By this sentence, I mean Pharoah sinned which caused God to restrict his grace. I don't claim Pharaoh was special in this regard. He was before Christ. I also don't claim Pharoah was condemned in advance.

 

[yuri_sakazaki]

everneo: describe how you think God can know all of the possible outcomes of a decision but not know the following decisions. What I mean is that I think the only way He could know the outcome is by knowing the choices decisions b, c, and d made because of the choice in decision a. He couldn't know outcomes of one decision if He didn't know the outcomes of decisions after that, because it is all streamed together. And yeah, I was back to square one, that was stupid of me. Yes, not knowing the future renders God blind of the future. But, if He didn't have any idea where anything was going in the future, you are saying that we have no purpose for ourselves because there would be such a significant likelihood that any intended purpose would be impossible to fulfill. You are saying that we are created as an experiment and for a purpose to God but have none to complete for ourselves, again, making life pointless to live except for God's amusement and observation. I have no reason to think that's not the case, but it's too pessimistic for me.

 

[everneo]

everneo: describe how you think God can know all of the possible outcomes of a decision but not know the following decisions. What I mean is that I think the only way He could know the outcome is by knowing the choices decisions b, c, and d made because of the choice in decision a. He couldn't know outcomes of one decision if He didn't know the outcomes of decisions after that, because it is all streamed together.

I said all the possible outcomes. That is different from knowing absolutely a specific path of decisions is going to happen.

Yes, not knowing the future renders God blind of the future.

Not fixing the future does not mean inability and it does not render him blind of the future. It is an open end of many possibilities that God is aware of.

But, if He didn't have any idea where anything was going in the future, you are saying that we have no purpose for ourselves because there would be such a significant likelihood that any intended purpose would be impossible to fulfill.

Why should he not have any idea where anything was going on in the future and why he should have an absolute knowledge of a certain course that is going to happen ?

You are saying that we are created as an experiment and for a purpose to God but have none to complete for ourselves, again, making life pointless to live except for God's amusement and observation. I have no reason to think that's not the case, but it's too pessimistic for me.

Look, i am not saying anything so sure of what is God's purpose. All i implied by saying experiment is, the very purpose might be, might be, a testing/demonstration of freewill (restricted ofcourse) of humans. I am not pessimistic, i have my own personal purpose of my life.

 

[audible]

so is god limited everneo, or is god eternal, infinite, unlimited, forever, and always.

 

[water]

Mario,


For crying out loud, please.

What is surely limited is our knowledge and our abilities, but this doesn't necessarily mean that our free will is limited.

You are confusing free will with 1. drives, 2. being an omnimax entity, and 3. absoluteness.

 

[everneo]

so is god limited everneo, or is god eternal, infinite, unlimited, forever, and always.

I am not sure about your question, how God could be considered limited. For not knowing absolutely about the future of certain things ?

If god is eternal, infinite, unlimited, forever, and always does that mean God should know absolutely about the future (should have predetermined the future) ?

 

[water]

I am not sure about your question, how God could be considered limited. For not knowing absolutely about the future of certain things ?

If god is eternal, infinite, unlimited, forever, and always does that mean God should know absolutely about the future (should have predetermined the future) ?

The determinist would say yes -- for him, god being another name for determinism, and functioning the same way as determinism.

 

[cole grey]

ok. sorry to always talk like this, but it just isn't that simple. Our free-will is limited tremendously -
I didn't will my existence, or at least 50% of the way things work, yet I have the ability to end it and change it tremendously. I have the ability to change my perspective and situation in life, but I cannot fully control it. Some people have a lot of freedom, others do not, whether that freedom is the freedom to act or the freedom to think -
If this question is an either/or, we are either hopelessly myopic in our perspectives and cannot hope for an answer, or perhaps we are asking the wrong question...
Glad I could be of little assistance, haha.
The first thing we need to do is stop wasting time on common mistakes, like saying God can't know the future without determining the future. If God can exist outside of our limitations somehow, God doesn't have to relate to time the way we do, if God is controlled by God's creation, that is not God. Or rather, if that is how God works, perhaps we are the ones determining God, by needing God to act a certain way to accomodate something that God could have created differently to acommodate God? This is an endless circle.
We are like fish trying to explain the flight of a bird with fish logic.

This can go on endlessly, while our lives pass and our hair gets gray, and we have spent our lives trying to figure out whether we have this bloody free will or not -- instead of doing something. What a shame.

I know you must be aware that you are the pot calling the kettle black - OR - If you aren't talking about talking about free-will, you may have something bubbling, what are you talking about here? Also, just like it must be cold enough for snow to go snowboarding, perhaps doing "something" isn't possible right now, for some of us. To every season, turn, turn, blah.

 

[fahrenheit 451]

I am not sure about your question, how God could be considered limited. For not knowing absolutely about the future of certain things ?

insult your own intelligence, but not everyone elses, thank you. if the christian God is not all knowing, all powerful, and ever present then he is not the God.

If god is eternal, infinite, unlimited, forever, and always does that mean God should know absolutely about the future (should have predetermined the future) ?

but of course, else he would not be the christian God.

 

[water]

ok. sorry to always talk like this, but it just isn't that simple. Our free-will is limited tremendously -
I didn't will my existence, or at least 50% of the way things work, yet I have the ability to end it and change it tremendously. I have the ability to change my perspective and situation in life, but I cannot fully control it. Some people have a lot of freedom, others do not, whether that freedom is the freedom to act or the freedom to think -
If this question is an either/or, we are either hopelessly myopic in our perspectives and cannot hope for an answer, or perhaps we are asking the wrong question...

The issue of free will is closely connected to what we attribute our successes, failings, shortcomings.

Attribute your not passing an exam to having "limited free will", and you undermine yourself as a person. Attribute that failing to lack of ability, laziness, car accident -- and your person remains intact.

Attribute your finding someone who loves you to be an act of your free will, and you are taking credit for things that were not under your control. This is how people take things for granted.

Glad I could be of little assistance, haha.

And you attribute this to ...?

The first thing we need to do is stop wasting time on common mistakes, like saying God can't know the future without determining the future. If God can exist outside of our limitations somehow, God doesn't have to relate to time the way we do, if God is controlled by God's creation, that is not God. Or rather, if that is how God works, perhaps we are the ones determining God, by needing God to act a certain way to accomodate something that God could have created differently to acommodate God? This is an endless circle.

If we are to bring God into the discussion of free will, then it makes no sense to doubt the characteristics of God as given in the Bible.

Doubting those characteristics is as meaningful as wondering whether the words "table" or "tree" are parts of the English language. If we decide to speak English, we use those words as parts of English, and that's it. We don't say, "table and tree may be English words, but who knows whether "chair" and "book" are?"

We accept the whole discourse, or none of it.

Same with God. Either accept the whole discourse, or none of it.

Thus, if we are to speak about God and free will, some axioms are:

1. God is just.
2. God gave us free will.
3. God is benevolent.
4. God is omnimax.


If one doesn't accept those axioms, then one is talking about some other god than that of the Bible, and should therefore not pretend to be making statements about God, Yahweh.

I know you must be aware that you are the pot calling the kettle black - OR - If you aren't talking about talking about free-will, you may have something bubbling, what are you talking about here? Also, just like it must be cold enough for snow to go snowboarding, perhaps doing "something" isn't possible right now, for some of us. To every season, turn, turn, blah.

Just because I air some criticism does not mean that I feel myself exempt from it! Not at all.

 

[everneo]

insult your own intelligence, but not everyone elses, thank you. if the christian God is not all knowing, all powerful, and ever present then he is not the God.

but of course, else he would not be the christian God.

Someone suddenly feels insulted on the 5th page. Excuse me, fault is not mine.

 

[MarcAC]

Get Over It!!!

I guess the real question to be asked is; "Does God's knowledge determine our actions or do our actions determine God's knowledge?" Similar to asking; "If I say I know the Sun will rise tomorrow and it does, does it mean I made the Sun rise?" I really can't see the problem. Knowledge is knowledge and nothing else.
-
On reviewing cole grey's [you tell them bro!] stellar post I must clarify here that I only refer to our actions and the consequences of those as "elements" of God's "universal knowledge set".
-
The basic idea being that: Omniscience has no particular consequences concerning free will. You may argue free will or the lack there of from some deterministic viewpoint but just leave omniscience out of it.

Hidden message to atheists: You cannot create a problem with free will and omniscience being antithetical concepts! Try something else to disprove the existence of God.​

 

[staples disconnected]

Hi water,

We cannot but live somewhere, in some environment -- so, sure, we cannot be but "influenced". To say that in order to have full free will, we should not be influenced in any way is the same like saying we should live in a vacuum, or be gods. Which is a nonsensical demand.

That is no demand, it is simply how I perceive the two words 'free will'. The truth is we are humans. We cannot live outside of what it is to be human. Taking drugs and going on some acid trip is still 'being human'. We can't escape it. Therefore, how can we say we have free will? I don't think we can.

If you believe you act in complete free will, then you understand the words in a different way to me. But it's like talking about communism. Most Americans will swear communism off as the devils work, but the extreme form of democracy (democracy which Americans apparently hold dear) would be every person representing themselves, which is basically communism. No true communist state has ever existed, they were all dictatorships. It has been brainwashed into Americans that they value the capitalistic society they exist in by big business, and no longer are they able to talk about communism without bias- with free will.

Believe what you want, but strictly talking about 'free will' as I understand its origions from the bible, no human has the ability to live in such a capacity. Either you know everything or you know nothing.

As an addon, perhaps as babies we have a period of free will, as it is during these times we will put our hands into fires and do other things before learning not too. Who knows?

staples

 

[§outh§tar]

Well well. Someone here is still as illiterate as ever.

 

[staples disconnected]

I hope you don't mean me. But I think you do after re-reading my post.

What is limited are our knowledge and our abilities -- but this doesn't automatically mean that our free will is limited.

I can't claim not to be a dumb ass, but perhaps I was over zealous in reinforcing my point. And I don't believe knowledge and ability can be removed from the notion of 'free will'.

staples

 

[yuri_sakazaki]

everneo (and everyone else), I get it now. Some of my comments must have seemed ridiculously nonsensical because I didn't understand certain aspects of what you were saying, so thanks for sticking with me, and cole grey is right even if half of your comments were in reference to me =P So you people can keep arguing it, but I got the answer I started the thread for.