Spirituality
14 Feb 09
09 Mar 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo would you agree that from that in your story the star has no free will?
So would you agree that from that in your story the star has no free will? There is no possibility that it will choose not to go supernova? Its apparent 'future' already exists. But this is really just a result of the fact that light travels at a finite speed so we do not normally learn of events until after they happen. It is quite a different claim to say that it is possible to learn of an event before it happens.
Not that anyone could be aware of.
There is no possibility that it will choose not to go supernova?
As stated, it already occurred for one of the participants.
Its apparent 'future' already exists.
Exactly.
But this is really just a result of the fact that light travels at a finite speed so we do not normally learn of events until after they happen.[b]
Sound, light, gossip. The fact remains, it was known by one party before the other party saw it happen.
[b]It is quite a different claim to say that it is possible to learn of an event before it happens.
Apparently not.
10 Mar 09
Originally posted by FreakyKBHHmmm…
Here's one.
(1) In the future, I am free to choose X;
(2) In the future, I am free to choose -X;
(3) God knows which of these I will choose prior to me making my choice.
(4) I still don't know which of these I will choose.
That should solve the problem...
I don’t know what exactly you mean by “in the future I will be free to choose” in your first two premises. It strikes me that it could be question-begging.
If I reformulate it (hopefully this is in line with what you mean; if not correct me):
(1) In the future, I will be confronted with a choice, X or ~X;
(2) God knows which of these I will choose prior to my making the choice;
(3) I still don’t know which of these I will choose.
I think this still defines a case in which I can effectively only choose what God knows, a priori, I will choose. Again, my choice is not coerced (knowledge alone has no coercive effect). It is just that the statement of the case itself defines away any other possibility without contradiction.
To borrow from twhitehead, it is a description of what reality is. In the described reality, my free will reduces to just how I happen to deliberate about the choice; and effective free will is, as Agerg says, illusionary.
10 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by AgergI'm glad you cleared up the branches thing , I was about to ask you what species of tree you were refering to. Thank you for correcting my stupidity , I'm so lucky to have such an intellectual heavyweight such as you to guide me through the ambiguities of analogies.
ah jeez...you're thinking of a branch as a wooden appendage of a tree...see when you say each present moment is latent with possibilities, these are the *branches* (yeah I should have been more careful not to muddle you up there!)
Now those branches (no...we're not talking about [b]actual trees KM 😉 ), those points of latent possibilities had already b ...[text shortened]... ave known what you had done from its perspective whilst you had yet to consider it from yours.[/b]
Ok , so we have established that if God knows that you will choose X before you choose it (from your perspective) then you will choose X inevitably. So how does the fact that it's inevitable mean that choice X is determined and not free? It could be inevitable that you will make the free choice X at that point in time.
One thing is certain you WILL make a choice in your future. You can make only one choice. The fact that your future choice is X does not prove anything from an eternal perspective. If eternity is real then it's inevitable that God will know X (because he can't not know).
I think the basic problem here is that you reject eternity (which is fine) but if you hypothetically factor in an eternal 5ht dimension then do you not agree that there would be at least some things that are possible that would seem very very wierd to us?
Or do you that if you were a being in a 5th eternal dimension that it would be just like living within space/time? Surely you can't think that.
10 Mar 09
Originally posted by vistesd2) God knows which of these I will choose prior to my making the choice
Hmmm…
I don’t know what exactly you mean by “in the future I will be free to choose” in your first two premises. It strikes me that it could be question-begging.
If I reformulate it (hopefully this is in line with what you mean; if not correct me):
(1) In the future, I will be confronted with a choice, X or ~X;
(2) God knows which of these I ...[text shortened]... happen to deliberate about the choice; and effective free will is, as Agerg says, illusionary.
----------visted------------------------
2) can only be true in an absolute sense if all choices occur at a specific "time" and not before. You can only subscribe to 2) by invoking a newtonian clock against which all things happen at an appointed time which is true for all beings and all existence.
10 Mar 09
Originally posted by AgergYour lack of understanding of relativity doesn't help you, and it is you who says that God has seen me do X whilst I have simultaneously yet to do X.
Your lack of understanding of relativity doesn't help you, and it is you who says that God has seen me do X whilst I have simultaneously yet to do X...furthermore I'm not constraining your God at all. You merely lack the ability to think in detail about the garbage you're whimsically spewing at us
You're getting yourself all confused
--------agerg------------------------------
Yes , this is possible. Why do you think it's not? Do you think that all things in the universe and existence all occur at specific points in time for all beings and all circumstances( even eternal dimensions)?
The confusion is yours . You seem to think that X has it's place at a specific point on some newtonian clock which God and all things are bound to and cannot escape.
You ask yourself "how can X be known if it hasn't happened?" or "how can it have happened and not happen?" This is because you have the idea that if X has not yet occurred or you then X cannot have occurred for anyone or anything.
BUT---- this assumption can only be made if you assume a newtonian clock by which everything is measured against.You think " X cannot happen and not happen because it it hasn't happened for me then it must also be true for everything "
Your view is that everything happens at specific points like on some grand clock and this cannot be defied by anything. There is only one perspective on time - now is now and it's now "now" across the whole universe.
Let me give you a thought experiement. It's 11.48 GMT as I write this. What time do you think it is for God , 11.48? Do you think he is being governed by the same clock? Do you think it's 11.48 on Vega too?
10 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterThe free-will you are talkng about is merely pseudo free-will similar to the way my computer has pseudo free-will to crash sometimes.
I'm glad you cleared up the branches thing , I was about to ask you what species of tree you were refering to. Thank you for correcting my stupidity , I'm so lucky to have such an intellectual heavyweight such as you to guide me through the ambiguities of analogies.
Ok , so we have established that if God knows that you will choose X before you c imension that it would be just like living within space/time? Surely you can't think that.
Firstly, (and Ihave to keep saying this) I don't throw out or reject eternity, though would be keen to know how you define your "5th dimension: eternity"
Is there a 6th dimension of magic too???
Exactly what do you mean by eternity is a dimension?, please indulge my ignorance here
10 Mar 09
Originally posted by knightmeisterApart from your mistake in confusing time zones with relativity, your point highlights one of the problems with your concept of a coherent God that exists throughout space time. You are essentially claiming that God exists throughout space time and externally to space time and is a single unchanging being throughout. Yet when I point this out to you (that he is static) you don't seem to like it.
Let me give you a thought experiement. It's 11.48 GMT as I write this. What time do you think it is for God , 11.48? Do you think he is being governed by the same clock? Do you think it's 11.48 on Vega too?
10 Mar 09
The real difficulty with this discussion is that our view of the world is necessarily biased. We see the past as having existed (and static), the present as existing, and the future as non-existent and subject to possible variations.
This is all just an illusion of time.
The truth is that from a scientific point of view there is no reason to consider the past more existent than the future, nor is there a reason to think that the past is more fixed than the future - except by degree as dictated by the effects of entropy.
10 Mar 09
Originally posted by vistesdIf we were to take away the choice part and replace it with straight action, it is essentially the same idea.
Hmmm…
I don’t know what exactly you mean by “in the future I will be free to choose” in your first two premises. It strikes me that it could be question-begging.
If I reformulate it (hopefully this is in line with what you mean; if not correct me):
(1) In the future, I will be confronted with a choice, X or ~X;
(2) God knows which of these I wi ...[text shortened]... happen to deliberate about the choice; and effective free will is, as Agerg says, illusionary.[/b]
For instance, with Bob and Joe, for Bob, the supernova has already happened while for Joe, his night sky has yet to experience the same. The lag time is the distance between the two vantage points.
With God, the future is as solid as if it already happened (apologies to twhitehead). Bob's foreknowledge is only apparent because of his ability to travel instantaneously.
The fact of the matter is, we have already made all of our future choices. Their ramifications are just now unfolding; will shortly be made known.
11 Mar 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadi don't think he is a "single unchanging being throughout" . I think that the trinity tells us something quite interesting here. God enters into space/time in a specific way in Jesus. Jesus shows signs of his limitations by living as a real man. He does not know everything that will happen.
Apart from your mistake in confusing time zones with relativity, your point highlights one of the problems with your concept of a coherent God that exists throughout space time. You are essentially claiming that God exists throughout space time and externally to space time and is a single unchanging being throughout. Yet when I point this out to you (that he is static) you don't seem to like it.
The trinity is not static and neither is space/time static when one is in it. If there is one thing we can say about space time it's that it is not static , but maybe it is in your head somewhere in fantasy geometric model.
11 Mar 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo if there is no real difference between past and future then what is your problem. There is nothing about your past choices that can tell you if they are free or not , so why would future choices (known by God) be any different?
The real difficulty with this discussion is that our view of the world is necessarily biased. We see the past as having existed (and static), the present as existing, and the future as non-existent and subject to possible variations.
This is all just an illusion of time.
The truth is that from a scientific point of view there is no reason to consider th ...[text shortened]... the past is more fixed than the future - except by degree as dictated by the effects of entropy.