Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Free Will paradox

BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2011 11:40:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I heard this a long time ago, but I was wondering what the typical theist response is.

FWP:

If God is omnipotent, then he should be able to see the future. If he can see the future, then suppose that in this future he sees himself flipping a light switch. Now God has to make a "choice". If he doesn't flip the switch, then his foresight was wrong and he is not omnipotent. If he does flip the switch, then he fulfilled his foresight. However, this means that any time God looks into the future, he is forced to do exactly what he saw himself do, as if he acted differently, then his foresight was wrong. But if God can only do what he saw himself do, then he has no free will. He is limited in only one possible action, as taking a different action undermines his foresight and omnipotence. But if he has no free will, then he is not omnipotent because he can't do "anything", he can only do one thing.

Again, I'm not sure about my opinion of this. I'm wondering how theists respond to this problem.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2011 11:59:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Same response as the omnipotence paradox. Inquiretruth's explanation is the best i've seen. http://www.debate.org...

It basically comes down to the difference between maximal vs common omnipotence and omniscience.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2011 3:25:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The fundamental problem with these arguments are that God does not operate in this manner.

At most, you are going to be challenging a rather juvenile conception of what God is, and if someone is old enough to post on this site and still believes in that conception of God.. An argument like this isn't going to convince them.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2011 4:09:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/4/2011 11:40:54 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
I heard this a long time ago, but I was wondering what the typical theist response is.

FWP:

If God is omnipotent, then he should be able to see the future. If he can see the future, then suppose that in this future he sees himself flipping a light switch. Now God has to make a "choice". If he doesn't flip the switch, then his foresight was wrong and he is not omnipotent. If he does flip the switch, then he fulfilled his foresight. However, this means that any time God looks into the future, he is forced to do exactly what he saw himself do, as if he acted differently, then his foresight was wrong. But if God can only do what he saw himself do, then he has no free will. He is limited in only one possible action, as taking a different action undermines his foresight and omnipotence. But if he has no free will, then he is not omnipotent because he can't do "anything", he can only do one thing.

Again, I'm not sure about my opinion of this. I'm wondering how theists respond to this problem.

Technically, the way God operates is through consciousness. He also operates irreverent to our concept of time, which science reports is technically possible.

Therefore, once He makes a decision, that decision is not only made, it manifests, immediately.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2011 4:10:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/5/2011 3:25:21 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
The fundamental problem with these arguments are that God does not operate in this manner.

At most, you are going to be challenging a rather juvenile conception of what God is, and if someone is old enough to post on this site and still believes in that conception of God.. An argument like this isn't going to convince them.

You're an interesting one.
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2011 5:47:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
If a parent has been a teenager then they know teenagers think goofy. Since they know teenagers think goofy parents should protect teenagers from ALL stupid decisions. Result, a bunch of protected adults who don't know how to make a decision.

Our chaos is God's order. Our order is probably against God. Absent free will God becomes a liar because we are mere puppets in some show for heaven.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2011 8:57:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/5/2011 3:25:21 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
The fundamental problem with these arguments are that God does not operate in this manner.

At most, you are going to be challenging a rather juvenile conception of what God is, and if someone is old enough to post on this site and still believes in that conception of God.. An argument like this isn't going to convince them.

Yes everybody - CosmicAlfonzo is the one person who definitely knows how God operates.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2011 9:03:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/4/2011 11:59:02 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Same response as the omnipotence paradox. Inquiretruth's explanation is the best i've seen. http://www.debate.org...

It basically comes down to the difference between maximal vs common omnipotence and omniscience.

Paradoxes in general are self-refuting. That's the whole point of a paradox. Applying them to God only complicates things further. We already know that problems in logic exist (hence, paradoxes). Logic is not the be-all, end-all descriptor of the world that the "rational" people here like to praise it has. It's flawed just like our other descriptors. What becomes interesting then is whether or not logic applies to God. Is God bound by the laws of logic? Is God bound by the laws of physics? Again people ascribe whatever characteristics to God that they want - usually what happens to be convenient to their particular argument at the time or whatever. But everyone sees God differently, so there will never be a legitimate answer.
President of DDO
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2011 9:27:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/6/2011 9:03:15 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 11/4/2011 11:59:02 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Same response as the omnipotence paradox. Inquiretruth's explanation is the best i've seen. http://www.debate.org...

It basically comes down to the difference between maximal vs common omnipotence and omniscience.

Paradoxes in general are self-refuting. That's the whole point of a paradox. Applying them to God only complicates things further. We already know that problems in logic exist (hence, paradoxes). Logic is not the be-all, end-all descriptor of the world that the "rational" people here like to praise it has. It's flawed just like our other descriptors. What becomes interesting then is whether or not logic applies to God. Is God bound by the laws of logic? Is God bound by the laws of physics? Again people ascribe whatever characteristics to God that they want - usually what happens to be convenient to their particular argument at the time or whatever. But everyone sees God differently, so there will never be a legitimate answer.

That is one ignorant assertion, because paradoxes exist logic isn't the be all and end all. A paradox is a function of logic that shows certain things cannot be. In order for logic not to be perfect you would have to show a paradox of logic, not that paradoxes exist.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2011 10:36:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/6/2011 9:03:15 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 11/4/2011 11:59:02 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Same response as the omnipotence paradox. Inquiretruth's explanation is the best i've seen. http://www.debate.org...

It basically comes down to the difference between maximal vs common omnipotence and omniscience.

Paradoxes in general are self-refuting. That's the whole point of a paradox. Applying them to God only complicates things further. We already know that problems in logic exist (hence, paradoxes). Logic is not the be-all, end-all descriptor of the world that the "rational" people here like to praise it has. It's flawed just like our other descriptors. What becomes interesting then is whether or not logic applies to God. Is God bound by the laws of logic? Is God bound by the laws of physics? Again people ascribe whatever characteristics to God that they want - usually what happens to be convenient to their particular argument at the time or whatever. But everyone sees God differently, so there will never be a legitimate answer.

So if God isn't bound by logic, lets assume I run 20 sound arguments that directly conclude that a god can't exist. Can't the theist just say "Well, God can exist in spite of those because he isn't bound by your logical arguments."? That would seem to defeat the whole purpose of religious discussion.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2011 10:38:17 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/6/2011 9:27:25 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 11/6/2011 9:03:15 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 11/4/2011 11:59:02 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Same response as the omnipotence paradox. Inquiretruth's explanation is the best i've seen. http://www.debate.org...

It basically comes down to the difference between maximal vs common omnipotence and omniscience.

Paradoxes in general are self-refuting. That's the whole point of a paradox. Applying them to God only complicates things further. We already know that problems in logic exist (hence, paradoxes). Logic is not the be-all, end-all descriptor of the world that the "rational" people here like to praise it has. It's flawed just like our other descriptors. What becomes interesting then is whether or not logic applies to God. Is God bound by the laws of logic? Is God bound by the laws of physics? Again people ascribe whatever characteristics to God that they want - usually what happens to be convenient to their particular argument at the time or whatever. But everyone sees God differently, so there will never be a legitimate answer.


That is one ignorant assertion, because paradoxes exist logic isn't the be all and end all. A paradox is a function of logic that shows certain things cannot be. In order for logic not to be perfect you would have to show a paradox of logic, not that paradoxes exist.

Before I respond to this, to clarify, you think logic is perfect???
President of DDO
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2011 10:40:33 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/6/2011 10:38:17 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 11/6/2011 9:27:25 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 11/6/2011 9:03:15 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 11/4/2011 11:59:02 PM, bluesteel wrote:
Same response as the omnipotence paradox. Inquiretruth's explanation is the best i've seen. http://www.debate.org...

It basically comes down to the difference between maximal vs common omnipotence and omniscience.

Paradoxes in general are self-refuting. That's the whole point of a paradox. Applying them to God only complicates things further. We already know that problems in logic exist (hence, paradoxes). Logic is not the be-all, end-all descriptor of the world that the "rational" people here like to praise it has. It's flawed just like our other descriptors. What becomes interesting then is whether or not logic applies to God. Is God bound by the laws of logic? Is God bound by the laws of physics? Again people ascribe whatever characteristics to God that they want - usually what happens to be convenient to their particular argument at the time or whatever. But everyone sees God differently, so there will never be a legitimate answer.


That is one ignorant assertion, because paradoxes exist logic isn't the be all and end all. A paradox is a function of logic that shows certain things cannot be. In order for logic not to be perfect you would have to show a paradox of logic, not that paradoxes exist.

Before I respond to this, to clarify, you think logic is perfect???

Nothing illogical can possibly happen yes. Everything that occurs must be within the realm of logic.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.