NationStates Jolt Archive

Its been done before, but as nothing is ever finished on NS, we can start it again... :D

I claimed (despite being an agnostic) that:

God apparently gave man Free Will so predestination is a lie

and VoteEarly replied that

By claiming that God gave man free will, you undeify the deity, you debase God to the level of a mortal in the scope of His power.

To claim that God was surprised by original sin, you are claiming that He had no way of knowing... Wrong, He made it happen because it so suited Him to do so. All things are predestinated

So take it away...are our lives predestined by God, or did he just set the ball rolling and leave us to it?

God, by definition, is supposed to be all knowing.... so if god knows everything that happens and will happen, nothing can deviate from that and therefore, there is no choice. Everything is predetermined by god, by the definition of god…. No free will.

P.S. – I’m atheist, and believe we have the ability to choose, but I also believe in destiny.

Ah, so this is a discussion of determinism and indeterminism. It is my belief that it is impossible to know whether anything is predestined. The reason is that you get into extradimensional physics and quantum mechanics, which I am not nearly well enough versed in. It all depends on the nature of time, how it works. Is it something that can go forewards and backwards? If that is true, then obviously nothing can be different than a certain result in the future and the past. Then again, perhaps time is like a tree, branching off, so that as it goes foreward, multiple possibilities arise, so that you can go foreward and backward with an infinite number of future and the past going back to the beginning of time.

This would be awesome if there's a physicist out there who could explain some of this, but I can foresee this turning into a theological discussion rather than a physical one.

My thoughts are that although are lives are not predestined, there is a certain lack of choice that guides us. I do not believe in destiny, but i do believe that we are guided by those around us and by our actions to create our own destiny.

As for God, i cannot believe that an infinitely complicated (beyond our understanding) being can be proven to exist...and as such cannot be disproven either, so i do not believe he created us with a destiny in mind.

That is one of the all time great questions. Personally, I believe that God does give us free will. The fact that he can see what is going to happen does not mean that we have no control over what we do. He sees the results of our choices, they are still our choices.

However, a large school of thought in theology believes in predestination and currently science has been heading down that route too. So, in time I may be proven wrong. As scientists learn more about the brain and how it functions they are finding it easier to predict human behavior and which decision a particular person will make. The way things are shaping up, it looks like this age old question may be answered in the next 20 years, and the answer might be that those of us who do not believe in predestination (myself included) were wrong.

Those of you who find this question truly fascinating (apparently not many of you, judging by the amount of responses) should read Frank Herbert's Dune saga. It explores this issue, among many others. It is very good reading for the intellectuals who want to explore things such as predestination, the messiah concept, the fundamental flaws of humanity, world government and the balance of power, and the reliance on oil.

why not both? I don't believe in the existance of a God, at least in the common sense of the term, but nevermind, my belief on that ain't the point.

If God is all-seeing, then he would have no trouble in seeing all possible futures. He would be able to see the future, but it would be up to the individual which future they chose for themselves. Obviously, this would be an unwitting choice, for the most part.

But we have a God which can see the future, and humans with free-will. No big shakes there.

i think we should have the system of the ancient greek gods. you had free will but now and then the gods would have their own agenda and they would MAKE you do stupid shit. nothing was ever really your fault. the gods made you do it.

How about: Both. We have free will, but since God knows all out innermost thoughts He knows how we will chose? In other words our predetermined fate is such because we make it so.

If you don't get it don't ask me to explain because I can't. It's just an idea of mine (although probably about to be shot down very soon on here :s

God Is All knowing, he knows us, humans, and what we think and do, but he knows all before it happens, still, we make the choices, he knows we will make... that is free will, but known by God.

Jesus, (His son, if you believe the christians) Is born out of God before he created the world. He would have no use except somekind of 2nd personality, except when God would have forseen that we would choose for the darkside, when we sinned... therefor Jesus was born, and saved us.

He helps us to make choices though, and so does the devil, but doesnt choose for us.

For those among you who dont know the bible:
It says that the devil is a fallen angel, and it didnt fall because God told him to do, so the angels have a free will. and if the angels, servants of God have free will, why wouldnt have the children of God, humans, have free will?

P.S. Im Dutch, so apologies for my bad english

The fact that he can see what is going to happen does not mean that we have no control over what we do. He sees the results of our choices, they are still our choices.
But if he could see what will happen, then how could we make any other choice?

However, a large school of thought in theology believes in predestination and currently science has been heading down that route too. So, in time I may be proven wrong. As scientists learn more about the brain and how it functions they are finding it easier to predict human behavior and which decision a particular person will make. The way things are shaping up, it looks like this age old question may be answered in the next 20 years, and the answer might be that those of us who do not believe in predestination (myself included) were wrong.
No, what science can do is examine probabilities and tendencies, not absolutes. There is a certain probability that the future will turn out a certain way, but no guarantee from the contemporary scientific point of view.

Those of you who find this question truly fascinating (apparently not many of you, judging by the amount of responses) should read Frank Herbert's Dune saga.
Unfortunately, however, it declines after Dune. That really is the best book in the whole series.

God Is All knowing, he knows us, humans, and what we think and do, but he knows all before it happens, still, we make the choices, he knows we will make... that is free will, but known by God.

Jesus, (His son, if you believe the christians) Is born out of God before he created the world. He would have no use except somekind of 2nd personality, except when God would have forseen that we would choose for the darkside, when we sinned... therefor Jesus was born, and saved us.

He helps us to make choices though, and so does the devil, but doesnt choose for us.

For those among you who dont know the bible:
It says that the devil is a fallen angel, and it didnt fall because God told him to do, so the angels have a free will. and if the angels, servants of God have free will, why wouldnt have the children of God, humans, have free will?

P.S. Im Dutch, so apologies for my bad english

no worries with the language at all :)

But if he could see what will happen, then how could we make any other choice?

Jesus told Peter that he would – in the future – deny him three times. If Peter did not deny Jesus, then Jesus would be wrong and a false prophet. Since God is never wrong, then Jesus must have ensured that Peter did deny him, even if Peter decided later not to deny him.

Part of the confusion rests with the failure to distinguish between the temporal and the logical. For those who argue that God’s foreknowledge influences man’s free will, they make a mistake in asserting what is temporally true must also be logically true. In other words, because God knew, in the temporal, what would occur in the future his knowledge logically caused the action to occur.

Instead of saying that God’s foreknowledge caused the action, it is more appropriate to say that the action caused God’s knowledge. It is not as if, in the case of Peter’s denial, that God said, “I am going to ensure that you deny me by means of divine prerogative.” Rather, God is saying, “I know you will deny me because this is indeed what you will freely choose to do.”

Now some will argue, “But what if Peter decided to only deny Christ two times or not at all?” Then that is what Christ would have known because it is Peter’s actions in the future that actually cause God’s foreknowledge.

Part of the confusion rests with the failure to distinguish between the temporal and the logical. For those who argue that God’s foreknowledge influences man’s free will, they make a mistake in asserting what is temporally true must also be logically true. In other words, because God knew, in the temporal, what would occur in the future his knowledge logically caused the action to occur.
The thing is, that if god can see what will happen, then there is no other possible result. Which means that all is predetermined. There is an illusion of free will, but in actuality there is only one choice that can be made.

Though I really would like it if we could maybe steer away from christology...

But if he could see what will happen, then how could we make any other choice?

You could make any choice you want and thats the choice God will see if he looks into your future.



No, what science can do is examine probabilities and tendencies, not absolutes. There is a certain probability that the future will turn out a certain way, but no guarantee from the contemporary scientific point of view.

Thats what science can currently do, but there is a growing number of researchers who believe that they will be able to accurately predict even minor decisions that a person might make based on knowing how the brain works. I didnt claim science can currently do it, but there are a growing number of researches who believe that they will be able to do it in the future. Of course this remains to be seen.


Unfortunately, however, it declines after Dune. That really is the best book in the whole series.

I disagree. Dune only layed the groundwork, its Dune: Messiah, Children of Dune, and God Emperor of Dune that truly explored the grand concepts in depth. Dune is the best book only if you are interested in an adventure story. For those interested in exploring the grand concepts that Herbert sought to explore, they need to read at least up to God Emperor.

"Free will - God gave it man or are we just walking a predestined path?"

Yes.

Just because we lack the wisdom to reconcile the two doesn't mean they're mutually incompatible.

The thing is, that if god can see what will happen, then there is no other possible result. Which means that all is predetermined. There is an illusion of free will, but in actuality there is only one choice that can be made.

Its our actions that God knows will happen. God’s foreknowledge of the future does render the future fixed, but it does not follow that a fixed future requires a pre-fixing of human actions, nor does it require that human action and responsibility become meaningless concepts. God knows what every human will ever do, but He does not make every human do those things. Humans have the responsibility to make choices, but God knew what those choices would be from eternity. Human action fixes what will come to pass in time, but God has known those free human choices for all eternity, and thus in His omniscient mind the future is fixed, not in flux.

To demonstrate that we should not conclude that the fixation of the future in the mind of God detracts from human freedom, we need only examine the past. The past is fixed and unalterable, but the events of the past were established by the exercising of man’s free will (assuming that man has free will). If we had the mind of God, we could have perfect knowledge of all past events. Those events to which we have knowledge are fixed and unalterable, not because of our power to make them such, but because people made particular decisions which expressed themselves in a particular way as evidenced in the course of time. One would never say that our perfect knowledge of the past would render us the cause of the past. In like manner, neither should one’s perfect knowledge of the future be thought to make them the cause of every future action. God's perfect and complete knowledge of the future does not determine the actions of man, but rather allows Him to know every detail concerning the way in which man will exercise His freedom of choice. In the eternal mind of God, the end is known from the beginning, and all the actions of man can be considered "eternal history," but in the created realm the free actions of man come into being from the beginning to the end, making God's "foreknown history" a reality.

You could make any choice you want and thats the choice God will see if he looks into your future.
Why is it that people keep insisting on adding in god? I am trying to talk about whether the future is inalterable, and everyone else is just trying to say that god doesn't influence free will...

Thats what science can currently do, but there is a growing number of researchers who believe that they will be able to accurately predict even minor decisions that a person might make based on knowing how the brain works. I didnt claim science can currently do it, but there are a growing number of researches who believe that they will be able to do it in the future. Of course this remains to be seen.
The fact that we have a growing understanding of neuropsychology only means that free will doesn't actually exist, and that everything may be reduced to a level of physics. Which then in turn means that life has no meaning, we are just a particularuly advances gathering of matter. Not to put any negative connotations on that, by the by. I am just expressing a possible reality.

I disagree. Dune only layed the groundwork, its Dune: Messiah, Children of Dune, and God Emperor of Dune that truly explored the grand concepts in depth. Dune is the best book only if you are interested in an adventure story. For those interested in exploring the grand concepts that Herbert sought to explore, they need to read at least up to God Emperor.
Oh, conceptually it keeps going. But the quality of the novel declines.

If you believe in free will and an omniscient God, then you really have to place God outside of the framework of time. Future is a term for those within the framework. God, if omniscient, is not inside the framework. Just the premiss that this God knows all is sufficient to ensure this.
What is dificult here, is to conceptualize what it means to be outside of the framework of time, as our experiences are limited to being within this framework.
All arguments about God knowing the future are arguments from within the framework. All arguments that we are not free to choose our future actions if God is omnisicent are also from within the framework of time.

Omniscience and free will are logically compatible if the dimension of time is removed from the discussion. With the dimension of time included you have to choose between them.

My head hurts from trying to conceptualize being otside the framework of time. Good luck if you try it.

God, by definition, is supposed to be all knowing.... so if god knows everything that happens and will happen, nothing can deviate from that and therefore, there is no choice. Everything is predetermined by god, by the definition of god…. No free will.

P.S. – I’m atheist, and believe we have the ability to choose, but I also believe in destiny.

Oh, now we're going to get into the whole Matrix philosophy thing about "choice".

Why can't you have free will?

If the theory of a multiverse is correct, then all possible choices are made simultaneously. If God exists, he knows the multiverse.

This doesn't limit your choices. So you can still have free will.

See, I can only speak from personal experience. Myself, I feel that my actions are my own choice. After all, the entire concept of crime and punishment implies that one has a choice.

Assuming there's a god, and that he predestines our lives for every second, then the responsibility of the act can be taken from us, therefore the consequences can be removed as well. However, under the judeo-christian system, if you sin (do bad stuff, etc.) then you automatically go to hell (precluding intervention of quasi-deital constructs). Therefore, God itself appears to believe that our actions are a result of our own choices and are subject to punishment. Otherwise, if we are predestined to sin and god defines the every moment of our life, then casting beings with no free will (merely the delusion thereof) into eternal torment seems to be an extreme (and unfair) viewpoint.

Stepping back, I would say that there is a melding of predetermined behaviour and legitimate free will in each person. For instance, it is a given that if I see an attractive human of the appropriate gender, I feel some sort of arousal. However, my reaction to that ingrained animal response is entirely my choice. Some people are more people than others, while some humans qualify as something closer to an animal in terms of control over their predetermined responses. I know certain people whom flit from one situation to the next, using sheerly the responses that their mis-wired brains give them. One could effectively argue that this sort of person is predestined because their genetic makeup gives them the chemical codes which moment to moment dictate their behaviour. However, the process is entirely arbitrary and so chaotic that I feel any system would invariably fail to accurately predict the outcome of all social situations.

From a pysical standpoint, knowing something before it happens implies a form of "temporal tampering", where events not yet happened influence events that have already happened or are currently happening. In essence, it's mental time travel. Time travel is an iffy proposition at best. However, I feel the concept will ultimately be debunked by the "universal conservation of matter and energy", the idea that the amount of energy and matter in the universe remains consistent from beginning to end (Nuclear bombs function on this principle and the science seems consistent). Still, this isn't proof, but as no proof is forthcoming in favor of time travel, it still remains the province of science-fiction and sometimes religion.

That my $1.50 for now.

However, a large school of thought in theology believes in predestination and currently science has been heading down that route too. So, in time I may be proven wrong. As scientists learn more about the brain and how it functions they are finding it easier to predict human behavior and which decision a particular person will make. The way things are shaping up, it looks like this age old question may be answered in the next 20 years, and the answer might be that those of us who do not believe in predestination (myself included) were wrong.

Free will, surely does not mean uninfluenced decisions. If it is 35 degrees celsius outside, and you are offered a choice of a beer at ambient temperature or well chilled, I think I can predict which one you will choose. This does not mean, however that you did not choose freely. My prediction is only that, a prediction, it is not knowledge. If however I let go of a stone one meter above the ground, with nothing but air between it and the ground, I know, not believe, that it will fall. The stone can not decide to stay in mid air, but yoyu could decide to take the ambient temperature beer . A toothache or some other such factor may influence this, or you may simply decide, of your own free will, that you want the warm beer. (Strange, but possible)
Peredictability is not the same as predetermination.

If however I let go of a stone one meter above the ground, with nothing but air between it and the ground, I know, not believe, that it will fall. The stone can not decide to stay in mid air
Well, actually, it can. In fact, it can decide to go the opposite direction. However, the probability of this occuring (it's on the atomic level) is so slim that it is probably not able to be calculated in anyone's lifetime.

Well, actually, it can. In fact, it can decide to go the opposite direction. However, the probability of this occuring (it's on the atomic level) is so slim that it is probably not able to be calculated in anyone's lifetime.

True Gnostikos, but most people here do not understand enough quantum mechanics to understand that it could actually go anywhere in the universe whatsoever. The probabilities though mean that if this happens to you you simply will never be believed. (Not that it couldn't happen.)

True Gnostikos, but most people here do not understand enough quantum mechanics to understand that it could actually go anywhere in the universe whatsoever. The probabilities though mean that if this happens to you you simply will never be believed. (Not that it couldn't happen.)

Interestingly enough, I read an article not long ago in which it was said that scientists constructing antimatter in a lab had observed the same particle in two different places simultaneously, the idea being that matter may touch two places in space at one time. There are far-reaching, ludicrous implications to that.

Interestingly enough, I read an article not long ago in which it was said that scientists constructing antimatter in a lab had observed the same particle in two different places simultaneously, the idea being that matter may touch two places in space at one time. There are far-reaching, ludicrous implications to that.
Physicists have actually been able to cause matter to be in two places simulataneously, visible to the naked eye!!!. When I heard that, it's just...

I once had a conversation that went like this :

"Everything's fated! Destiny governs life!
-So let's say that you make a random choice. Choose Nutella instead of honey on your breakfast.
-That was fated.
-But then, a minute later, you go 'oh, no, let's take honey instead'.
-That was also fated!
-And yet, another minute later, you decide to excercise free will and force yourself to eat Nutella.
-Still destiny!
-It's your destiny to not be able to choose between Nutella and honey? You must be a fucking dumbass!
-Euhm... Err..."

I mean, yeah, why think and make choices when you can say destiny made you do it? If you're incapable to reason by yourself like a grown-up, and have not yet learned of anything called consequences, then, yeah, your destiny would be pretty cool if you spent your life getting shaved and yelling "baaa! baaa!".

Look, even if you're christian or muslim, you still have roots in the torah. So let's see the most basic religious source on it. Israel means "one who wrestles with G.d". Fight the odds. Fight G.d. He doesn't like pussies.

So it's written in the bible : FUCK DESTINY! (but don't fuck with statistics, thank you)

/yeah, that guy was really annoying with the same answer, over and over, and over, and over again...

Physicists have actually been able to cause matter to be in two places simulataneously, visible to the naked eye!!!. When I heard that, it's just...

It certainly implies a mind-bending flaw in our perception of space-time, doesn't it? If matter can inhabit two places at once, then there are truly limitless possibilities to the universe. Unless it can only be in two places at any given time. In which case there are only two possibilities *sad*.

Physicists have actually been able to cause matter to be in two places simulataneously, visible to the naked eye!!!. When I heard that, it's just...

Visible to the naked eye is a little bit of an exaggeration. They were doing this with electrons. Actually even the term matter may be an exaggeration, thinking about it. Energy, quantum wave form, those would apply.

A little off topic, but in the quantum world that concept does not apply anyway, so who cares.

It certainly implies a mind-bending flaw in our perception of space-time, doesn't it? If matter can inhabit two places at once, then there are truly limitless possibilities to the universe. Unless it can only be in two places at any given time. In which case there are only two possibilities *sad*.

Actually it not only can be, but is and is not, everywhere at the same time, until you identify where it is that it is. Then, when you identify where it is that it is, you know not onlly that it is there but that it is going to be everywhere, and not everywhere as soon as you stop pinning it down by observing it.

Look, even if you're christian or muslim, you still have roots in the torah.
Though it is indeed true that all Abrahamic religions are dervied from Judaism, I wouldn't phrase it that way for Muslims...

It certainly implies a mind-bending flaw in our perception of space-time, doesn't it? If matter can inhabit two places at once, then there are truly limitless possibilities to the universe. Unless it can only be in two places at any given time. In which case there are only two possibilities *sad*.
Well, no. There is a calculable probability that I am not sitting at my computer right now, that I am actually outside. It is extremely low, but it exists. That probability is the entire basis for radioactive decay. The fact that we can observe something like that with the nake eye, however, is just amazing that we could show it to that scale.

Visible to the naked eye is a little bit of an exaggeration. They were doing this with electrons. Actually even the term matter may be an exaggeration, thinking about it. Energy, quantum wave form, those would apply.
Eh, I don't remember what it was precisely. However, it was indeed that it was visible to the naked eye. It was in the movie What the Bleep Do We Know?, and assuming they were telling the truth, then it was indeed visible tot he naked eye. And I'm pretty sure it wasn't electrons. I don't really remember all that well, since this was a while ago and I'm more into biology than physics. And my memory is pretty bad. So maybe you're right.

i think we should have the system of the ancient greek gods. you had free will but now and then the gods would have their own agenda and they would MAKE you do stupid shit. nothing was ever really your fault. the gods made you do it.


that's about the christian equivalant of 'the devil made me do it'...kinda lame, but I can see your point....it would be nice if that were actually true :P

The thing is, that if god can see what will happen, then there is no other possible result. Which means that all is predetermined. There is an illusion of free will, but in actuality there is only one choice that can be made.

Though I really would like it if we could maybe steer away from christology...

what you need to remember is that nothing is absolute...when you are all saying 'god knows what is gunna happen', you forget that there is always going to be more than one possible outcome to anything and everything....therefore, having free will and universal destiny work in conjunction with each other to make the lives of people on this planet very interesting :)

what you need to remember is that nothing is absolute
Then we live in an indeterministic world.

Well, actually, it can. In fact, it can decide to go the opposite direction. However, the probability of this occuring (it's on the atomic level) is so slim that it is probably not able to be calculated in anyone's lifetime.


that of course, is assuming that the rock is sentient and has will free from *gravity*....a person really doesn't have a choice *if* they fall because of graviyt, but they can choose *how* to fall because they have the ability to move around freely of their own volition (sp?)...

Then we live in an indeterministic world.

exactly

Interestingly enough, I read an article not long ago in which it was said that scientists constructing antimatter in a lab had observed the same particle in two different places simultaneously, the idea being that matter may touch two places in space at one time. There are far-reaching, ludicrous implications to that.

wow..that's totally amazing! where's that article? I want to read it...

that of course, is assuming that the rock is sentient and has will free from *gravity*....a person really doesn't have a choice *if* they fall because of graviyt, but they can choose *how* to fall because they have the ability to move around freely of their own volition (sp?)...
I was using that figuratively. I was not actually referring to the stone actually "choosing" anything. I was referring to what occurs at an atomic level. :rolleyes:

exactly
Yet the entire argument is whether we have one or not.

that of course, is assuming that the rock is sentient and has will free from *gravity*....a person really doesn't have a choice *if* they fall because of graviyt, but they can choose *how* to fall because they have the ability to move around freely of their own volition (sp?)...

The "decide" part of Gnostikos reply I didn't notice. I would question though, whether this volition that we are aware of, is not just an effect of the QM events in our brains? To this degree I am not sure that we have choice, any more than the falling rock does. If it is subject to the indeterminate laws of physics, then surely we are as well.
Indeterminacy just means that the out come is not predictable, there is no element of volition or intent required.

The "decide" part of Gnostikos reply I didn't notice. I would question though, whether this volition that we are aware of, is not just an effect of the QM events in our brains? To this degree I am not sure that we have choice, any more than the falling rock does. If it is subject to the indeterminate laws of physics, then surely we are as well.
Indeterminacy just means that the out come is not predictable, there is no element of volition or intent required.
Yes, exactly what meant to say. I guess I should be a little more careful with my figurative language here...

I was using that figuratively. I was not actually referring to the stone actually "choosing" anything. I was referring to what occurs at an atomic level. :rolleyes:

fair nuf, just being 'devil's advocate' :P I'm not exactly a science whiz...

Yet the entire argument is whether we have one or not.

well, this is me exercising my free will?

if we want to argue if we have a life or not, then we'd have to start with the definition of 'life' (not in that whole miracle of birth way)

if we want to argue whether life is predetermined, or if we just have free will...I say both and neither....Life just is....there are some things that you have a choice about (large percentage, though), and some things you don't (small percentage)

for example, I have a choice whether to randomly hit this person next to me, what I can't predict though is how he will react...the probability of him hitting me back is just as likely as him balling up into a corner and crying....he has to make his own choice, I can't choose for him, even though it will likely effect my life at that very second....

so, if we want to talk about probability instead of something intangible like 'destiny', maybe we would get further? meh, just me though....

Bender: "So, do you know what I'm gonna do before I do it?"
God: "Yes."
Bender: "What if I do something different?"
God: "Then I don't know that."

Bender: "So, do you know what I'm gonna do before I do it?"
God: "Yes."
Bender: "What if I do something different?"
God: "Then I don't know that."


LOL

wow..that's totally amazing! where's that article? I want to read it...

What I could find was this http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/626-1.html which means I owe Gnostikos an apology. Sorry, I was wrong. It was a largish group of atoms in a Bose-Einstein condensate state. I am still not sure that it is exactly visible to the naked eye though, given the extreme conditions required.

What I could find was this http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/626-1.html which means I owe Gnostikos an apology. Sorry, I was wrong. It was a largish group of atoms in a Bose-Einstein condensate state. I am still not sure that it is exactly visible to the naked eye though, given the extreme conditions required.


cool, thanks!

so, if we want to talk about probability instead of something intangible like 'destiny', maybe we would get further? meh, just me though....
The argument is whether there is one future of multiple possible futures. If time is like a line, then nothing may deviate from the line. If the line branches off, then there are mulitple possible futures. It all depends on the nature of time, as I stated earlier.

Edit:
So, basically, does time itself have possibilities of one or two dimensions? Does it have strictly length or length and width. But, seeing as it actually has more than three dimensions, it must then have length, width, depth, and ?

Come on, damnit! Is there not one physicist here?

Yes, exactly what meant to say. I guess I should be a little more careful with my figurative language here...
Its probably not your fault. I think its a symptom of the way qm is taught, especially in chemistry classes. "The atom wants to be like a noble gas." Geh.

Its been done before, but as nothing is ever finished on NS, we can start it again... :D

I claimed (despite being an agnostic) that:



and VoteEarly replied that



So take it away...are our lives predestined by God, or did he just set the ball rolling and leave us to it?

Free will is one of the foundational gifts God has bestowed on us. Forknowledge does not equal predestination. For some reason people seem to think that knowing a thing causes/predestines it to happen. This is a misunderstanding of foreknowledge.

Its probably not your fault. I think its a symptom of the way qm is taught, especially in chemistry classes. "The atom wants to be like a noble gas." Geh.
No, no, that's not it. I was probably acting like the chemistry teacher who instructs like that. So now I'm using figurative language condecsedingly...

Its probably not your fault. I think its a symptom of the way qm is taught, especially in chemistry classes. "The atom wants to be like a noble gas." Geh.

But it does, nobility is one of the eternal virtues. :p

so, if we want to talk about probability instead of something intangible like 'destiny', maybe we would get further? meh, just me though...

This, surely, is just an invitation for the majority to show their ignorance. There is probably no subject that more people think they understand when in reality they don't have a clue. (This probably includes me above a very basic level).

It is also pretty intangible in itself. Destiny, may actually be clearer, in most peoples thinking than probability.

Free will is one of the foundational gifts God has bestowed on us. Forknowledge does not equal predestination. For some reason people seem to think that knowing a thing causes/predestines it to happen. This is a misunderstanding of foreknowledge.


There we go! I think you put what I was trying to say much more eloquently...except for the god part :P Considering I woke up not too long ago, much of what I'm saying probly sounds more akin to babbling...I'm a brook today, sorry :P

(This probably includes me above a very basic level)
What is the probablity?

But it does, nobility is one of the eternal virtues. :p



This, surely, is just an invitation for the majority to show their ignorance. There is probably no subject that more people think they understand when in reality they don't have a clue. (This probably includes me above a very basic level).

It is also pretty intangible in itself. Destiny, may actually be clearer, in most peoples thinking than probability.


but the reality of that (as we can see) is that we really have no clue about 'destiny'...we just have an illusion in our thinking that we might actually be able to comprehend it if it exists...the very nature of 'destiny' tells us that we can't possibly understand it...kinda funny actually :rolleyes:

but the reality of that (as we can see) is that we really have no clue about 'destiny'...we just have an illusion in our thinking that we might actually be able to comprehend it if it exists...the very nature of 'destiny' tells us that we can't possibly understand it...kinda funny actually :rolleyes:
Which leads us directly to subjectivism.

Free will is one of the foundational gifts God has bestowed on us. Forknowledge does not equal predestination. For some reason people seem to think that knowing a thing causes/predestines it to happen. This is a misunderstanding of foreknowledge.
But foreknoledge + omnipotence means he either knew bad things were going to happen to people (sent to hell) and chose to still create things exactly the way he did or is not omnipotent

In order to answer the theollogical question properly you must abandon the human conception of knowing. God doesn't have to know in the limited way that humans do. The way God knows could be very different from he way humans know. Because of this, there is no logical conflict between omniscience and free will.

As for the scientific question, the most reasonable answer is no. If we could quantify human thought processes and determine exactly how they are effected by outside stimuli we could predict what any individual would do in acy situation. Unfortunatly, we can't.

Its our actions that God knows will happen. God’s foreknowledge of the future does render the future fixed, but it does not follow that a fixed future requires a pre-fixing of human actions, nor does it require that human action and responsibility become meaningless concepts. God knows what every human will ever do, but He does not make every human do those things. Humans have the responsibility to make choices, but God knew what those choices would be from eternity. Human action fixes what will come to pass in time, but God has known those free human choices for all eternity, and thus in His omniscient mind the future is fixed, not in flux.

To demonstrate that we should not conclude that the fixation of the future in the mind of God detracts from human freedom, we need only examine the past. The past is fixed and unalterable, but the events of the past were established by the exercising of man’s free will (assuming that man has free will). If we had the mind of God, we could have perfect knowledge of all past events. Those events to which we have knowledge are fixed and unalterable, not because of our power to make them such, but because people made particular decisions which expressed themselves in a particular way as evidenced in the course of time. One would never say that our perfect knowledge of the past would render us the cause of the past. In like manner, neither should one’s perfect knowledge of the future be thought to make them the cause of every future action. God's perfect and complete knowledge of the future does not determine the actions of man, but rather allows Him to know every detail concerning the way in which man will exercise His freedom of choice. In the eternal mind of God, the end is known from the beginning, and all the actions of man can be considered "eternal history," but in the created realm the free actions of man come into being from the beginning to the end, making God's "foreknown history" a reality.

This argument would be perfect, if God were divorced from the processes of the universe. However, God is connected to the processes of the universe through the act of creation and possibly through other acts. Every time God acts it alters human destiny and, being omnipotent, God knows exactly how Its action will influance a person's choices.

God, if it acts upon the Universe at all, influances human choices. More importantly, It knows exactly how its actions will influance human choices and thus has the power to alter the choices of every human that every will exist. Even changing the energy state of a single particle at the time of creation would have greatly changed the course of histroy.

There are other pssibilites, of course. It is possible that God lacks free will. It is also possible that God doesn't interact with the wrold in any way that humans can understand and that any religion that suggests otherwise is incorrect.

Gods knowledge of all events, past, current and future does not exclude free will or imply predestination. Put yourself in gods shoes and tangle with the following situation: (scaled down to meet your intellectual capacity as opposed to gods supposedly limitless variety). You release an object that you hold in your hand. You know it's going to fall to the ground since you are familiar with the laws of physics. The object, however, unaware as it is of the findings of Newton, will still be slightly bewildered as it travels downwards, speculating as it goes on the nessecity of falling.

Your knowledge of action\reaction does not preclude the workings of a free will, but since you made the rules, the will of an object, sentient or not, may not come into play that often......

Betcha god has a few laughs about that one too.

Gods knowledge of all events, past, current and future does not exclude free will or imply predestination. Put yourself in gods shoes and tangle with the following situation: (scaled down to meet your intellectual capacity as opposed to gods supposedly limitless variety). You release an object that you hold in your hand. You know it's going to fall to the ground since you are familiar with the laws of physics. The object, however, unaware as it is of the findings of Newton, will still be slightly bewildered as it travels downwards, speculating as it goes on the nessecity of falling.

Your knowledge of action\reaction does not preclude the workings of a free will, but since you made the rules, the will of an object, sentient or not, may not come into play that often......

Betcha god has a few laughs about that one too.
Wha...?

Sorry I didn't get back to this thread earlier, it's been a crazy few days. The article I made reference to was in Discover magazine... several years ago. I can't even begin to narrow it down past that. The article contained the notations about the anti-matter as a side-note, it was mostly concerning the findings of one physicist whom claims that all matter has these alternate placements which imply alternate realities, for instance, a place where my dead grandma's atoms still move about under her forcible control (i.e., she ain't dead there... yet).

If I really wanted to just be completely nasty about it, I would say that I THINK I have free-will, so I will continue to act in such a fashion until I am proven to be acting out a destiny.

As far as physicists go, I know of at least one physicist (I don't know his name, don't ask) whom has stated that, "Physics, as we know it, may be an entirely local phenomenon." He says this because things outside of our solar system do not behave the way we expect them to, unless you add in massive quantities of matter that we can't currently detect.

And now I'm off-subject. Sorry to thread-resurrect.

Nobody told me this discussion was going on, I'll get in on it shortly.