God's knowledge doesn't contradict with man's free will.

[Redoubtable]

If God were to exist and were to be omniscient and the Creator of all things, there would be absolutley no way around Predestination.

That is all I have to say about this trite topic.

 

[matnay]

God could not possibly have perfect knowledge. If he did it would interfer with his own free will because he would have to know everything that he would be thinking for eternity. This is an impossible task for even God.

Imagine this:

Far into our future we invent a computer so powerful that it is capable of perfectly predicting every event on earth 5 seconds into the future- from every human thought to the weather(it is called "earth prediction mode" when performing this operation). The only thing the computer wouldn't be able to have perfect prior knowledge of is the state of it's own future processes while in "earth prediction mode". This would require infinite memory. The computer would freeze, and even if it did have infinite memory, the prediction would take an infinite amount of time.

This is my best guess anyway. Any thoughts on this?

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by everneo
i am concerned at free will though it is limited but significant enough to prove that the universe cannot be deterministic when free will is involved.

It seems to me you're stating your conclusion as a premise. We have free-will therefore the Universe is not completely deterministic is not a valid argument.

i disappointed, then and now, that conservative definitions still rules.

For some reason it makes some people happy to assume that everything that happens in our lives has been plotted out in advance by God. Some people simply do not want the responsibility of their own choices it seems.

That is your known point of view.

I don't know of any infallible methods, do you?

should we abondon all our classical methods as flawed and useless.? every valid tool has its own limitations and proper, limited use of the same is not disingenuous.

No, you said it well, "every valid tool has it's limitations". I was merely pointing out that using illogic to bypass a logical conundrum would be inappropriate. I wasn't trying to assert that you had done so, merely giving a warning (and perhaps a point for some others on this board to take note of).

~Raithere

 

[everneo]

Originally posted by Raithere
It seems to me you're stating your conclusion as a premise. We have free-will therefore the Universe is not completely deterministic is not a valid argument.

ok, since the term free will appears in the beginning and end of that statement it looks to be that the premise and conclusion are same. not so really. i am sure of my premise (free will) and conclude that universe is not completely deterministic. unless freewill is shown as deterministic otherwise, it is a valid premise for the argument.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by everneo
i am sure of my premise (free will) and conclude that universe is not completely deterministic. unless freewill is shown as deterministic otherwise, it is a valid premise for the argument.

My point was that free-will is presumed rather than demonstrated. Which is fine as long as it's recognized as such.
Of course, the presumption kind of makes the thread question irrelevant.

~Raithere