Does an Omniscient Creator Lead to Fatalism?

[Tassman]

That was you, not me.

You said to Carp (#229) “It is not necessary for God's omniscience to be preserved that we cannot choose other than what He has foreknown, only that we do not choose otherwise”.

My response was (and is) that "we do not choose otherwise” is merely another way of saying “that we cannot choose otherwise. By saying that we “do not choose otherwise” is to remove the element of choice, which is the basic tenet of ‘free-will’.

[JonathanL]

You said to Carp (#229) “It is not necessary for God's omniscience to be preserved that we cannot choose other than what He has foreknown, only that we do not choose otherwise”.

My response was (and is) that "we do not choose otherwise” is merely another way of saying “that we cannot choose otherwise. By saying that we “do not choose otherwise” is to remove the element of choice, which is the basic tenet of ‘free-will’.

You introduced the notion of not being able to choose otherwise (i.e "we cannot choose otherwise") if God already foreknows our choices, because if we could choose otherwise God's omniscience would be nullified. My response to that (although you might have missed that it was a response to what you've been claiming in this thread, since it was baked in with my reply to Carpe and I didn't call you out directly or quote you), was that it's not necessary for God's omniscience to be preserved that we cannot choose other than what He's foreknown, only that we don't choose otherwise. They're not the same thing at all.

"Not choosing to do X" doesn't imply inability to do X in the same way "can't choose X" does. If you're able to do X, but decide against it you're choosing not to do X, but it doesn't mean you are unable to do X. My claim is that for God's omniscience to be preserved all that's necessary is that for every future choice we make it's enough that we don't choose contrary to God's foreknowledge and that the claim that in order for God's omniscience not to be nullified we have to be locked in to our choices, being unable to choose otherwise, is false.

[Tassman]

You introduced the notion of not being able to choose otherwise (i.e "we cannot choose otherwise") if God already foreknows our choices, because if we could choose otherwise God's omniscience would be nullified. My response to that (although you might have missed that it was a response to what you've been claiming in this thread, since it was baked in with my reply to Carpe and I didn't call you out directly or quote you), was that it's not necessary for God's omniscience to be preserved that we cannot choose other than what He's foreknown, only that we don't choose otherwise. [/B]

WHY don’t we choose otherwise? This is what you need to answer.

They're not the same thing at all.

Well yes they are in practise. You are merely making a semantic argument.

"Not choosing to do X" doesn't imply inability to do X in the same way "can't choose X" does. If you're able to do X, but decide against it you're choosing not to do X, but it doesn't mean you are unable to do X. My claim is that for God's omniscience to be preserved all that's necessary is that for every future choice we make it's enough that we don't choose contrary to God's foreknowledge and that the claim that in order for God's omniscience not to be nullified we have to be locked in to our choices, being unable to choose otherwise, is false.

Again, WHY don’t we choose otherwise?

[JonathanL]

WHY don’t we choose otherwise?

That depends entirely on the circumstances we find ourselves in when making our choices.

Well yes they are in practise. You are merely making a semantic argument.

In what universe are the phrases "Cannot do X" and "Does not do X" equivalent to each other?

[Sparko]

There is, IMO, a solid tension between "all of time already exists in a time continuum" and "your choices are free." If the universe "exists" in all dimensions, both space and time, then all has been determined and "choice" is an illusion. Indeed, action itself becomes nothing more than an illusion created by time. I do not see how this can be escaped. One can say "free will" all day every day, but if the entire continuum exists, there is no autonomy whatsoever. We're not talking about a recording here - which records actions that have previously occurred. We're talking about the actual universe, which has now been reduced to a static, unchanging reality. It appears to change "over time," but that is the illusion created by time. In reality - the entire universe is a fixed, unchanging thing, factoring in the temporal dimension.

I am still not finding anything that suggests this is what "B-Theory" suggests, and no one here is providing a link. So where on earth are you getting this concept?

Einstein's Relativity shows that time is an actual dimension, just like space. that is what SPACE-TIME means. Our universe is a 4 dimensional fabric, three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. That is the B-theory of time. The math works out.

Also there is another theory that each decision or action that can have multiple outcomes, all of the outcomes occur. The many-worlds theory. So if you can eat pancakes or bacon for breakfast, you will do both and each will create a new universe. So you have your "free will" and each universe is also "fixed" - this also has scientific evidence that it is true. So in this universe it is true that you freely chose to eat bacon and eggs, and in another parallel universe you freely chose to eat pancakes and another one you ate nothing, etc. In this universe you always ate bacon and eggs and from our point of view you always did and it can't be changed.

So basically God just actualizes the world lines where you freely chose what fit with his plans.


Also a note to JimL: -- In other threads you, tassman, and other have argued that there is no such thing as free will because everything is physical and happens "mechanically" - your thoughts included. That if you could perfectly know the position of every atom and how they would react you could predict every action. That free will is just an illusion. So why are you having such a hard time with it now in this thread trying to deny a "block universe?"

[Sparko]

Here is a pretty good explanation by Brian Greene of the B-theory of time. You need to watch it all the way through as the first half of the video is about the way we normally experience time, which of course is the A-theory. In the end you will see that according to physics, the A-theory is wrong, time doesn't flow, all of time, just like all of space, exists, which is why we now call it spacetime. The past and the future are just as real as the present. Hopefully Sparko will watch it as it is something I tried to explain to him 9 or 10 years ago and he has mocked me for it ever since.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1WfFkp4puw

wait so NOW you are agreeing with me about the B-theory of time? sigh.

Notice he never said that we don't have free will. The video says exactly what I was saying: The universe is a "recording" of all of the actions ever done or will be done. But those actions of ours recorded or frozen in time are the result of free will.

And I mocked you for saying that if you were a few light years from earth and you moved away from the earth you would be actually traveling back in time. No you would not. You would just be further from Earth and the light from earth would take longer to reach you so you could see further back in Earth's history.

[Sparko]

WHY don’t we choose otherwise? This is what you need to answer.

because we freely chose not to. duh.

[37818]

Not being able to travel faster than light one would not be able to see light from one's past.

[carpedm9587]

[QUOTE=Sparko;513412]Einstein's Relativity shows that time is an actual dimension, just like space. that is what SPACE-TIME means. Our universe is a 4 dimensional fabric, three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. That is the B-theory of time. The math works out.

I am aware of the theory - and I am aware of space time. I am not finding anywhere that the proposition is that the time dimension is existent and complete in all directions in the way you describe. I have asked multiple times for resources that say this, because I am not finding it. I, so far, have no received a single link or source that justifies this view. I'm beginning to think they don't exist.

Also there is another theory that each decision or action that can have multiple outcomes, all of the outcomes occur. The many-worlds theory. So if you can eat pancakes or bacon for breakfast, you will do both and each will create a new universe. So you have your "free will" and each universe is also "fixed" - this also has scientific evidence that it is true. So in this universe it is true that you freely chose to eat bacon and eggs, and in another parallel universe you freely chose to eat pancakes and another one you ate nothing, etc. In this universe you always ate bacon and eggs and from our point of view you always did and it can't be changed.

So basically God just actualizes the world lines where you freely chose what fit with his plans.

Also a note to JimL: -- In other threads you, tassman, and other have argued that there is no such thing as free will because everything is physical and happens "mechanically" - your thoughts included. That if you could perfectly know the position of every atom and how they would react you could predict every action. That free will is just an illusion. So why are you having such a hard time with it now in this thread trying to deny a "block universe?"

I am aware of the multiple-universe argument. Again, a theory based on the mathematics that has yet to be shown to be true in the way that the Big Bang and universe expansion have been shown to be true. I have already spoken to the problem of "creating the universe that produces the outcomes god wants." No one has given me a counter argument I find compelling. If god can see all universes, see all possible choices, and then realizes the universe that turns out the exact universe they want, they (by definition) eliminate the possibility of all other universes. Ergo, I am not free to choose otherwise because that would be a different universe which god ruled out by his/her/its creative action. Free will becomes an illusion of choice within the fixed universe god created. It is the same problem the B-Theory (as you have articulated it) has.

At this point, I'm just repeating myself, so I'll leave the last to you unless you ask me a question that requires an answer. I am still waiting for links to substantiate your interpretation of B-Theory. As I noted, I have looked and not found anything.

[Sparko]

Einstein's Relativity shows that time is an actual dimension, just like space. that is what SPACE-TIME means. Our universe is a 4 dimensional fabric, three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. That is the B-theory of time. The math works out.

I am aware of the theory - and I am aware of space time. I am not finding anywhere that the proposition is that the time dimension is existent and complete in all directions in the way you describe. I have asked multiple times for resources that say this, because I am not finding it. I, so far, have no received a single link or source that justifies this view. I'm beginning to think they don't exist.

Relativity says that. If you are aware of the theory then you already know this. Did you watch the video that JimL posted a link to? It goes over all that. Watch it. well worth 32 minutes of your time.

I am aware of the multiple-universe argument. Again, a theory based on the mathematics that has yet to be shown to be true in the way that the Big Bang and universe expansion have been shown to be true.

no wrong again. There is experimental evidence that it is true such as the double-slit experiment. Pretty much all of quantum mechanics depends on probability functions that can collapse into different states depending on someone observing them but all states existing equally until that happens.

I have already spoken to the problem of "creating the universe that produces the outcomes god wants." No one has given me a counter argument I find compelling. If god can see all universes, see all possible choices, and then realizes the universe that turns out the exact universe they want, they (by definition) eliminate the possibility of all other universes. Ergo, I am not free to choose otherwise because that would be a different universe which god ruled out by his/her/its creative action. Free will becomes an illusion of choice within the fixed universe god created. It is the same problem the B-Theory (as you have articulated it) has.

IN each of those possible universes you are the one making the choice freely. Whether you choose pancakes or bacon, you made the choice for that universe.

At this point, I'm just repeating myself, so I'll leave the last to you unless you ask me a question that requires an answer. I am still waiting for links to substantiate your interpretation of B-Theory. As I noted, I have looked and not found anything.

Watch the video JimL posted a link to.

[JimL]

Relativity says that. If you are aware of the theory then you already know this. Did you watch the video that JimL posted a link to? It goes over all that. Watch it. well worth 32 minutes of your time.


no wrong again. There is experimental evidence that it is true such as the double-slit experiment. Pretty much all of quantum mechanics depends on probability functions that can collapse into different states depending on someone observing them but all states existing equally until that happens.



IN each of those possible universes you are the one making the choice freely. Whether you choose pancakes or bacon, you made the choice for that universe.

Watch the video JimL posted a link to.

Again Sparko, you're completely misunderstanding Multi-verse theory. Multi-verse theory is based on Schroedingers equation which is completely determined. There isn't one you in this universe freely choosing to eat pancakes for breakfast and another you in a different universe freely choosing to eat eggs for breakfast, there are, according to the theory, multiple you's in multiple universes who are each determined to make different choices. No free will in multi-verse theory!

[Sparko]

Again Sparko, you're completely misunderstanding Multi-verse theory. Multi-verse theory is based on Schroedingers equation which is completely determined. There isn't one you in this universe freely choosing to eat pancakes for breakfast and another you in a different universe freely choosing to eat eggs for breakfast, there are, according to the theory, multiple you's in multiple universes who are each determined to make different choices. No free will in multi-verse theory!

JimL, your understanding of physics is horrible.

OK let's go with your view. What determines that I eat pancakes in Universe A and Bacon in Universe B?

[JimL]

wait so NOW you are agreeing with me about the B-theory of time? sigh.

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, I'm simply explaining the error you are making with respect to it.

Notice he never said that we don't have free will. The video says exactly what I was saying: The universe is a "recording" of all of the actions ever done or will be done. But those actions of ours recorded or frozen in time are the result of free will.

Notice, he didn't have to. For one thing the talk was not about free will, it was about the nature of time. The fact that you can't have a static time in which it all exists from beginning to end, ergo all events in it are fixed, should make clear to you that it is absent of free will.

And I mocked you for saying that if you were a few light years from earth and you moved away from the earth you would be actually traveling back in time. No you would not. You would just be further from Earth and the light from earth would take longer to reach you so you could see further back in Earth's history.

Actually what he was trying to explain is that the future is every bit as real as the present and that your relative motion in far distant space determines where on the timeline you would line up with on earth, its past, its present or even its future. In other words the Block universe is all there, past, present, and future all exist, always have existed, and actually change/time and so obviously free will, is, as Einstein put it, an illusion, no matter how persistent.

[JimL]

JimL, your understanding of physics is horrible.

OK let's go with your view. What determines that I eat pancakes in Universe A and Bacon in Universe B?

Multi-verse theory as developed by Everett with respect to Schroeders equation which is itself completely determined.

[Sparko]

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, I'm simply explaining the error you are making with respect to it.

Notice, he didn't have to. For one thing the talk was not about free will, it was about the nature of time. The fact that you can't have a static time in which it all exists from beginning to end, ergo all events in it are fixed, should make clear to you that it is absent of free will.

Actually what he was trying to explain is that the future is every bit as real as the present and that your relative motion in far distant space determines where on the timeline you would line up with on earth, its past, its present or even its future. In other words the Block universe is all there, past, present, and future all exist, always have existed, and actually change/time and so obviously free will, is, as Einstein put it, an illusion, no matter how persistent.

No Jim you actually thought that moving in space would move you backwards and forwards in time. Shadowmaster and I both had a good laugh at that. And like always even when confronted that you were wrong you would not admit it and just kept doubling down on your stupid.

As far as free will.... The actions that are "fixed" in the block universe had to have a cause because the actions of people are ordered and make sense and are not just random which would happen if there were no decisions being made. I say the cause is free will. Prove me wrong.