12 Dec '13 14:00>
Originally posted by LemonJelloCan you clarify exactly what is meant here by libertarian free will?
Yeah I am using some possible world semantics. I guess the reason why i think some modal operator is needed here is that, at least to my mind, infallibility should provide immunity from the mere possibility of epistemic error, which is different from just providing for the lack of epistemic error. For instance, just that something is free from er ...[text shortened]... ter being a stronger condition.
However, I am open to different opinions on all of this....
I am currently assuming it means the ability to have any physically possible
thought, and undertake any physically possible action "at will".
If that is what libertarian free will is... Then I can't see how it's possibly compatible
with a god (or anything else) KNOWING with epistemic certainty what the choice WILL
be. Because in such a situation that choice, which hasn't been made yet*, can't be
changed and thus can't be free.
*By the supposedly free agent.