| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Damien Stanton" |
| Date: |
25 Jun 2004 02:50:37 AM |
| Object: |
to clear things up: free will |
Hi Folks,
God can successfully predict every one of our actions decided by what is
from our perspective free will. The fact that God could know from the start
of the universe how the whole of time will pan out does not mean that from
our perspective we don't have free will. To say that you don't free will
because you cannot do anything other than what is determined by God is a
misunderstanding. You will not do anything else but what God already knows
you will do, but from your perspective you will have exercised free will.
Is this merely an illusion of free will and not actually bonafide free will?
There is no difference! Free will of a person could only ever be from the
perspective of that person. It doesn't matter whether there is some entity
somewhere that knows what your every move will be.
This topic has been done to death in universities - there really isn't
anything else to be said about it.
Damien
.
|
|
| User: "Abner Mintz" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 01:36:41 PM |
|
|
Abner Mintz wrote:
That's not free will - that's determinism not only of your choices
but also of your perceptions. You can't give something free will
by forcing it not only to make certain decisions but also to think
it had free will in doing what you forced it to do. :)
Damien Stanton <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's not about forcing. To you it will be freely choosing.
Just because a person who is forced to do x mistakenly thinks
(because his views were also forced) that he has free will
does not mean that he actually has free will. He is mistaken.
Thinking you have free will is as good as you're going to get
in relation to free will.
Then you have proven that your worldview is deterministic;
your version of God is incompatible with free will, the best
it can manage is forcing people to mistakenly think that
they have free will.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 06:41:13 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:14:48 +0800, "Damien Stanton"
<stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
It is not a free choice. Something already told me what my choice
would be. If I would all of sudden shout: 'no, I choose...' that
something finishes my sentence before I can: '... choose A, because
you tried to exercise your free will. I knew that too.' No free will.
I'm sorry, but it is free will.
Why? Because you refuse to admit you have been defeated?
Things are all determined from the start of time,
no free will.
unless God intervenes in which case the determination is set on a new
path.
no free will.
Because God is omniscient (for the sake of argument) and honest, when
he whispers in your ear and says, "you will choose X' this means that you
will choose X. Period. To you it will seem like you could have chosen Y
but you freely chose X. The hypothetical that you're hoping for simply will
never happen.
Nonsense.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 10:52:27 AM |
|
|
"Jos Flachs" <|wcruise|@ksc15.th.com> wrote in message
news:tirvd0hsj348g3eqi5rth3391863229qm0@4ax.com...
Because God is omniscient (for the sake of argument) and honest, when
he whispers in your ear and says, "you will choose X' this means that you
will choose X. Period. To you it will seem like you could have chosen Y
but you freely chose X. The hypothetical that you're hoping for simply
will
never happen.
Nonsense.
IF we assume God is omniscient then he wouldn't say 'you will choose 'x'' if
you are going to choose 'y' because then he wouldn't be omniscient.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Abner Mintz" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 01:36:27 PM |
|
|
Damien Stanton <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
IF we assume God is omniscient then he wouldn't say 'you will choose 'x'' if
you are going to choose 'y' because then he wouldn't be omniscient.
You have assumed an omniscient God and come to a conclusion
incompatible with free will. Thus, you have shown that
an omniscient God is incompatible with free will. :)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 10:12:26 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:52:27 +0800, "Damien Stanton"
<stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Jos Flachs" <|wcruise|@ksc15.th.com> wrote in message
news:tirvd0hsj348g3eqi5rth3391863229qm0@4ax.com...
Because God is omniscient (for the sake of argument) and honest, when
he whispers in your ear and says, "you will choose X' this means that you
will choose X. Period. To you it will seem like you could have chosen Y
but you freely chose X. The hypothetical that you're hoping for simply
will
never happen.
Nonsense.
IF we assume God is omniscient then he wouldn't say 'you will choose 'x'' if
you are going to choose 'y' because then he wouldn't be omniscient.
What a pity you decide to debate in alt.atheism. We do NOT assume
anything with gods here. Maybe you could try a christian newsgroup?
They might follow your line without much blatter. We do not.
Like most christians, who try to ram their point of view down our
throats, we have to assume quite a bit, to satisfy your needs.
Besides, it is 'they', not 'he'. In the singular it would be 'it', we
do not know the gender or race of this god. Humans can be 'he' or
'she', everything else is 'it'.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
26 Jun 2004 03:53:08 PM |
|
|
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40dd76c8$0$24742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:hcaqd0hui498h2bkqvcb1j0ke9fpvqni6g@4ax.com...
I don't think 100% prediction means you don't have free will, the two
concepts are separate.
It is not just prediction if one is assuming an omniscient, omnipotent
being. He is not just predicting; he made it all, and had perfect
control over what he made. He knew everything that would happen as a
result of his creation. It was all his choice. No part of it could
have been merely a prediction.
Prediction, creation... whatever. He knows/created what will happen, but
from your perspective you're choosing it.
Dude, if the god is just an observer, then perhaps an argument can be made
that we have free will. But if the god created us, then we're just entities
programmed to make the choices we do.
From the computer's perspective, does it have free will?
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
27 Jun 2004 12:08:41 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:XPqdnd9ShN3Cf0DdRVn-vA@io.com...
Prediction, creation... whatever. He knows/created what will happen,
but
from your perspective you're choosing it.
Dude, if the god is just an observer, then perhaps an argument can be made
that we have free will. But if the god created us, then we're just
entities
programmed to make the choices we do.
Yes, we are, from God's perspective.
From the computer's perspective, does it have free will?
I think free will has to be something only its holder can know it has. Only
the computer knows whether it has free will. We can only guess from its
behaviour, just like we infer free will in other people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
27 Jun 2004 12:42:41 AM |
|
|
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40de564e$0$24758$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:XPqdnd9ShN3Cf0DdRVn-vA@io.com...
Prediction, creation... whatever. He knows/created what will happen,
but
from your perspective you're choosing it.
Dude, if the god is just an observer, then perhaps an argument can be
made
that we have free will. But if the god created us, then we're just
entities
programmed to make the choices we do.
Yes, we are, from God's perspective.
The Supposed god's perspective is superior to ours because it includes
information we don't have. What that means is that our perspective is not
just different, it's WRONG because of our ignorance of the truth. And the
truth is that we don't have free will, as you insist, because that's the
truth the god sees because the god posseses all the facts.
This would make our perspective ignorant and wrong, not just a different
viewpoint. We would be wrong in our opinion that we have free will.
From the computer's perspective, does it have free will?
I think free will has to be something only its holder can know it has.
Then you can't tell us we have free will. You can only insist that you have
it. And according to you, you would be wrong, because you are ignorant of
the facts that the god has.
Only
the computer knows whether it has free will. We can only guess from its
behaviour, just like we infer free will in other people.
I don't infer free will in other people. I don't infer free will at all.
First you have to show that free will exists before you can claim that a god
gave it to you. Showing that a god exists would be helpful as well.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
27 Jun 2004 11:16:10 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:5r-dnRkKGYtQw0PdRVn-ig@io.com...
Dude, if the god is just an observer, then perhaps an argument can be
made
that we have free will. But if the god created us, then we're just
entities
programmed to make the choices we do.
Yes, we are, from God's perspective.
The Supposed god's perspective is superior to ours because it includes
information we don't have. What that means is that our perspective is not
just different, it's WRONG because of our ignorance of the truth. And the
truth is that we don't have free will, as you insist, because that's the
truth the god sees because the god posseses all the facts.
This would make our perspective ignorant and wrong, not just a different
viewpoint. We would be wrong in our opinion that we have free will.
We only have our viewpoint so there would be no way of telling whether our
opinion is wrong. We can't really be sure about anything so perhaps there's
no point in discussing anything at all.
Then you can't tell us we have free will. You can only insist that you
have
it. And according to you, you would be wrong, because you are ignorant of
the facts that the god has.
Only
the computer knows whether it has free will. We can only guess from its
behaviour, just like we infer free will in other people.
I don't infer free will in other people. I don't infer free will at all.
First you have to show that free will exists before you can claim that a
god
gave it to you. Showing that a god exists would be helpful as well.
If you don't believe in free will then the whole discussion is not relevant
to you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
27 Jun 2004 01:07:51 PM |
|
|
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40def2be$0$24753$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:5r-dnRkKGYtQw0PdRVn-ig@io.com...
Dude, if the god is just an observer, then perhaps an argument can
be
made
that we have free will. But if the god created us, then we're just
entities
programmed to make the choices we do.
Yes, we are, from God's perspective.
The Supposed god's perspective is superior to ours because it includes
information we don't have. What that means is that our perspective is
not
just different, it's WRONG because of our ignorance of the truth. And
the
truth is that we don't have free will, as you insist, because that's the
truth the god sees because the god posseses all the facts.
This would make our perspective ignorant and wrong, not just a different
viewpoint. We would be wrong in our opinion that we have free will.
We only have our viewpoint so there would be no way of telling whether our
opinion is wrong. We can't really be sure about anything so perhaps
there's
no point in discussing anything at all.
But the bible itself describes the god telling people what they will do, and
despite their best efforts, they end up doing it anyway. That's basically
the same scenario I presented of the god telling you your future thoughts
and actions on a moment to moment basis. The Bible presents that basic
principle as the true state of affairs.
So you are ignoring the viewpoint of the bible.
Then you can't tell us we have free will. You can only insist that you
have
it. And according to you, you would be wrong, because you are ignorant
of
the facts that the god has.
Only
the computer knows whether it has free will. We can only guess from
its
behaviour, just like we infer free will in other people.
I don't infer free will in other people. I don't infer free will at all.
First you have to show that free will exists before you can claim that a
god
gave it to you. Showing that a god exists would be helpful as well.
If you don't believe in free will then the whole discussion is not
relevant
to you.
I don't just not believe in it, I honestly cannot see how it could possibly
work. If you could demonstrate that it exists, then I would be forced to
agree that it does.
Can you? Can you even define it?
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 12:42:50 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:5pWdnUwVKsfskELd4p2dnA@io.com...
If you don't believe in free will then the whole discussion is not
relevant
to you.
I don't just not believe in it, I honestly cannot see how it could
possibly
work. If you could demonstrate that it exists, then I would be forced to
agree that it does.
Can you? Can you even define it?
No I can't, it's just something I know I have. If you don't believe you
have free will then fine, then there is no problem with an omniscient god is
there?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 08:41:59 AM |
|
|
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40dfafd0$0$24747$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:5pWdnUwVKsfskELd4p2dnA@io.com...
If you don't believe in free will then the whole discussion is not
relevant
to you.
I don't just not believe in it, I honestly cannot see how it could
possibly
work. If you could demonstrate that it exists, then I would be forced to
agree that it does.
Can you? Can you even define it?
No I can't, it's just something I know I have.
What is? What is it you know you have? Until you define it, it's
meaningless.
So, unless you define it, we can only assume you are claiming to have
something meaningless.
If you don't believe you
have free will then fine, then there is no problem with an omniscient god
is
there?
If I don't believe I have what? What is it you are saying I don't believe I
have? Free will? Until you define it, it's meaningless. I'm happy to say I
don't believe I have something meaningless.
Until you define free will, you're just making noise.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 10:48:42 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:c9WdncNn4I08vX3dRVn-vg@io.com...
Can you? Can you even define it?
No I can't, it's just something I know I have.
What is? What is it you know you have? Until you define it, it's
meaningless.
So, unless you define it, we can only assume you are claiming to have
something meaningless.
Free will is me knowing I can type 5 or 10 at the end of this sentence
according to what I choose: 10.
If you don't believe you
have free will then fine, then there is no problem with an omniscient
god
is
there?
If I don't believe I have what? What is it you are saying I don't believe
I
have? Free will? Until you define it, it's meaningless. I'm happy to say I
don't believe I have something meaningless.
Until you define free will, you're just making noise.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 11:28:27 AM |
|
|
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40e03dd0$0$24749$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:c9WdncNn4I08vX3dRVn-vg@io.com...
Can you? Can you even define it?
No I can't, it's just something I know I have.
What is? What is it you know you have? Until you define it, it's
meaningless.
So, unless you define it, we can only assume you are claiming to have
something meaningless.
Free will is me knowing I can type 5 or 10 at the end of this sentence
according to what I choose: 10.
You have not shown that you chose to type 10.
I don't like seafood. I did not choose to dislike seafood. I would actually
prefer to like seafood and enjoy it with my friends. But I can't. Obviously
my choice counts for exactly nothing regarding my liking seafood. The
dislike is imposed upon me.
Why should I credit that you typing 10 at the end of the sentence was any
less imposed?
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
29 Jun 2004 12:16:18 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:LqOdnZjH4r3I2n3dRVn-jg@io.com...
You have not shown that you chose to type 10.
I don't like seafood. I did not choose to dislike seafood. I would
actually
prefer to like seafood and enjoy it with my friends. But I can't.
Obviously
my choice counts for exactly nothing regarding my liking seafood. The
dislike is imposed upon me.
Why should I credit that you typing 10 at the end of the sentence was any
less imposed?
Your opinion doesn't matter. Only I know if I have free will.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D4" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
29 Jun 2004 12:30:24 AM |
|
|
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> said:
...Only I know if I have free will.
If you do.
Jim07D4
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
29 Jun 2004 03:38:25 AM |
|
|
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40e0fb19$0$24750$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:LqOdnZjH4r3I2n3dRVn-jg@io.com...
You have not shown that you chose to type 10.
I don't like seafood. I did not choose to dislike seafood. I would
actually
prefer to like seafood and enjoy it with my friends. But I can't.
Obviously
my choice counts for exactly nothing regarding my liking seafood. The
dislike is imposed upon me.
Why should I credit that you typing 10 at the end of the sentence was
any
less imposed?
Your opinion doesn't matter. Only I know if I have free will.
Is there something you dislike that other people enjoy? Something that you
did not choose to dislike?
If so, where's the free will in that? And how can you be certain that all
your likes and dislikes, that are the very motivations for your choices, are
not likewise imposed?
I'm not stating an opinion, I'm offering an observation that demonstrates
that at least some of your will is not your own, and that casts serious
doubt on the rest.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff Young" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
29 Jun 2004 01:31:11 PM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message news:<LqOdnZjH4r3I2n3dRVn-jg@io.com>...
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40e03dd0$0$24749$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:c9WdncNn4I08vX3dRVn-vg@io.com...
Can you? Can you even define it?
No I can't, it's just something I know I have.
What is? What is it you know you have? Until you define it, it's
meaningless.
So, unless you define it, we can only assume you are claiming to have
something meaningless.
Free will is me knowing I can type 5 or 10 at the end of this sentence
according to what I choose: 10.
You have not shown that you chose to type 10.
Then try this definition: knowing that I intend to type 12 at the end
of this message and knowing that I have the ability to do so
(inductively, i.e. based on the fact that I've been able to type any
such text as "12" _every_ time I've intended to do so in the past).
Jeff
12
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
29 Jun 2004 02:05:57 PM |
|
|
"Jeff Young" <jientho@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6f553a4.0406291031.66b2f646@posting.google.com...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:<LqOdnZjH4r3I2n3dRVn-jg@io.com>...
"Damien Stanton" <stanton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40e03dd0$0$24749$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:c9WdncNn4I08vX3dRVn-vg@io.com...
Can you? Can you even define it?
No I can't, it's just something I know I have.
What is? What is it you know you have? Until you define it, it's
meaningless.
So, unless you define it, we can only assume you are claiming to
have
something meaningless.
Free will is me knowing I can type 5 or 10 at the end of this sentence
according to what I choose: 10.
You have not shown that you chose to type 10.
Then try this definition: knowing that I intend to type 12 at the end
of this message and knowing that I have the ability to do so
(inductively, i.e. based on the fact that I've been able to type any
such text as "12" _every_ time I've intended to do so in the past).
How did the intention appear in your mind? Did it just pop up at random? Or
was it the result of consideration utilizing the imposed likes and dislikes
that you are stuck with. Either way, you're a slave. You're either a slave
to a random number generator, or you are slave to the imposed likes and
dislikes that are the motivations for your decisions.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 12:05:57 PM |
|
|
Damien Stanton wrote:
Free will is me knowing I can type 5 or 10 at the end of this sentence
according to what I choose: 10.
You are taking it for granted (begging the question) that you determine
your own behavior, freely, by force of your own will, capriciously,
unpredictably. You can't just have your conclusion taken for granted as
a premise of your argument, you must demonstrate how it is that is known
objectively that is the actual state of affairs so that anybody else can
check your observations.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 03:01:43 PM |
|
|
In article <VdYDc.193673$Ly.105365@attbi_s01>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Damien Stanton wrote:
Free will is me knowing I can type 5 or 10 at the end of this sentence
according to what I choose: 10.
You are taking it for granted (begging the question) that you determine
your own behavior, freely, by force of your own will, capriciously,
unpredictably. You can't just have your conclusion taken for granted as
a premise of your argument, you must demonstrate how it is that is known
objectively that is the actual state of affairs so that anybody else can
check your observations.
And Dixit, AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, wishes to beg the
question by assuming, equaly without proof, that everything one does can
be predetermined.
Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, you can't just have your conclusion
taken for granted as a premise of your argument, you must demonstrate
how it is that is known objectively that is the actual state of affairs
so that anybody else can check your observations.
So far, the issue of free will is an open question, though there is
evidence that Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, cannot act rationally, so
may be an examplle of a person without free will.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 06:17:00 PM |
|
|
Virgil wrote:
So far, the issue of free will is an open question...
You are mistaken. There is absolutely no reason to assume that any
organism has the power to determine its own behavior by force of will,
capriciously.
The scientific evidence tends to indicate that behavior is determined by
the contingencies of reinforcement (the rewards so to speak), not
determined capriciously by the individual himself, nor determined by any
god.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=behavior+analysis&btnG=Google+Search
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 07:17:36 PM |
|
|
In article <MF1Ec.712$AI.230@attbi_s04>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
Virgil wrote:
So far, the issue of free will is an open question...
You are mistaken. There is absolutely no reason to assume that any
organism has the power to determine its own behavior by force of will,
capriciously.
There is absolutely no reason to assume that no organism has any power
to determine its own behavior by force of will.
If there were, Dixit, AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, would have
cited it here.
The scientific evidence tends to indicate that behavior is determined by
the contingencies of reinforcement (the rewards so to speak), not
determined capriciously by the individual himself, nor determined by any
god.
There is certainly no conclusive evidence of complete determinism, which
is the pup Dixit, AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, is trying to
sell.
The most one can say of "the contingencies of reinforcement" is that
they influence actions but are not known to determine them.
Unless Dixit, AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, has evidence that he
has not presented.
No serious psychologist since Bloody Fool Skinner has proposed that
known influences could completely determine behavior in anything more
complex that a flatworm.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas P." |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
26 Jun 2004 01:53:34 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 21:14:56 +0800, "Damien Stanton"
<stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:hcaqd0hui498h2bkqvcb1j0ke9fpvqni6g@4ax.com...
I don't think 100% prediction means you don't have free will, the two
concepts are separate.
It is not just prediction if one is assuming an omniscient, omnipotent
being. He is not just predicting; he made it all, and had perfect
control over what he made. He knew everything that would happen as a
result of his creation. It was all his choice. No part of it could
have been merely a prediction.
Prediction, creation... whatever. He knows/created what will happen, but
from your perspective you're choosing it.
Which makes no difference what-so-ever, and you are still babbling
nonsense.
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
27 Jun 2004 12:04:02 AM |
|
|
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:nnfrd099i3uif5345ljmj8sknce42of1no@4ax.com...
Prediction, creation... whatever. He knows/created what will happen, but
from your perspective you're choosing it.
Which makes no difference what-so-ever, and you are still babbling
nonsense.
Makes no difference to what?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas P." |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
27 Jun 2004 03:34:53 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 13:04:02 +0800, "Damien Stanton"
<stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:nnfrd099i3uif5345ljmj8sknce42of1no@4ax.com...
Prediction, creation... whatever. He knows/created what will happen, but
from your perspective you're choosing it.
Which makes no difference what-so-ever, and you are still babbling
nonsense.
Makes no difference to what?
Reality. From one person's perspective the moon might be made of ice
cream. It makes no difference; the moon remains what it actually is
no matter what a person's perspective is.
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
27 Jun 2004 12:52:45 PM |
|
|
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:cbtsd09d588a6hde8ejjqhgs65tbtiq1rq@4ax.com...
Which makes no difference what-so-ever, and you are still babbling
nonsense.
Makes no difference to what?
Reality. From one person's perspective the moon might be made of ice
cream. It makes no difference; the moon remains what it actually is
no matter what a person's perspective is.
Free will is something that can only be ascertained from a personal point of
view.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas P." |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 02:34:08 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 01:52:45 +0800, "Damien Stanton"
<stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:cbtsd09d588a6hde8ejjqhgs65tbtiq1rq@4ax.com...
Which makes no difference what-so-ever, and you are still babbling
nonsense.
Makes no difference to what?
Reality. From one person's perspective the moon might be made of ice
cream. It makes no difference; the moon remains what it actually is
no matter what a person's perspective is.
Free will is something that can only be ascertained from a personal point of
view.
Once again you choose to ignore the point. Using "ascertain" instead
of "perceive" changes nothing. Reality is still independent of what
one perceives, ascertains or any other synonyms you choose.
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Damien Stanton" |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 03:09:38 AM |
|
|
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:4rbvd0lsnoj70c9vegrii7ro7c56v6it7k@4ax.com...
Free will is something that can only be ascertained from a personal point
of
view.
Once again you choose to ignore the point. Using "ascertain" instead
of "perceive" changes nothing. Reality is still independent of what
one perceives, ascertains or any other synonyms you choose.
Whether you have free will is something only you know, I cannot say to you
that you don't have free will.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas P." |
|
| Title: Re: to clear things up: free will |
28 Jun 2004 02:20:00 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:09:38 +0800, "Damien Stanton"
<stanton@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Thomas P." <thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:4rbvd0lsnoj70c9vegrii7ro7c56v6it7k@4ax.com...
Free will is something that can only be ascertained from a personal point
of
view.
Once again you choose to ignore the point. Using "ascertain" instead
of "perceive" changes nothing. Reality is still independent of what
one perceives, ascertains or any other synonyms you choose.
Whether you have free will is something only you know, I cannot say to you
that you don't have free will.
And you continue to ignore the point. If a person has free will, his
actions are not determined by another. What he perceives, what he
thinks he knows, what he ascertains, what he feels has nothing to do
with the matter. It cannot be any simpler than that. Something
cannot be true and not true at the same time, and that is what you are
insisting is the case. .
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
