An omniscient God is incompatible with free will.


Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

An omniscient God is incompatible with free will. If God knows the future and can't be wrong then it's not possible for the future to be anything other than what god knows it will be, therefor we can't do anything other than what God knows we're going to do.
>God isn't making you do things just by knowing that's what you'll do
Yes he is. I do not have the option to do anything other than what God knows I'll do.
>God's foreknowledge doesn't change the fact that you're the one making the choices
There are no possible choices other than the one God knows I'm going to make, the things that seem to me like possible choices are illusory because they can't actually happen.
>God is beyond time so he can see all of it at once, he knows what you'll do because from his perspective you've already done it
This doesn't effect the argument. If choices are able to happen, even if we were to somehow conceive of some timeless version of what "making a choice" would be (which would hypothetically be what Satan did), it's still not possible for that choice to be anything other than what God knows.
>why does this matter?
Because if God(the christian God specifically) is omniscient then it means that he creates human beings knowing that they will go to hell for sins they had no choice but to commit.

  1. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    What's wrong with creating people knowing they will go to hell?

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      No one ever asked to be brought into existence

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        Then why do you continue existing?

        > what's wrong with torturing sentient beings for eternity?!
        Least deranged Christian

        Not an argument. Accept Jesus Christ.

        If, as christians believe, God is just and doesn't want people to sin or go to hell then he wouldn't create people knowing that that was their only option.

        Who said he doesn't want people who deserve to go to hell to go to hell? Hell is justice for those who disbelieved in him despite all the evidence provided, despite all the chances received.

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          Many people kill themselves, many people try and have horrible injuries as a result

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          Would it not be preferable if everyone believed in him and went to heaven? Isn't the reason we were created to come to know God and live forever with him in heaven? Christians will say that God gave us free will so that our choice to serve him could be genuine but as I've pointed out, how can free will exist when God simply knowing what our choices will be gives us no other option?
          So if we don't have free will and our reason for existing in the first place is to serve God then why does he create people that can't serve that purpose and then punish them just for existing(when he's the one that made them exist that way in the first place)?

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            How can you create something that doesn't have flaws? Creation is by its very nature flawed.

            Many people kill themselves, many people try and have horrible injuries as a result

            Try harder.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              >just kill yourself then
              >oh it's also a sin so you go to hell for doing it

              All Christian "morality" is basically disproven by the fact that no one was given the choice whether to exist and therefore it's immoral to punish them

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      > what's wrong with torturing sentient beings for eternity?!
      Least deranged Christian

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        If you don't have free will then you aren't sentient. You're just a robot following a predetermined program.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      If, as christians believe, God is just and doesn't want people to sin or go to hell then he wouldn't create people knowing that that was their only option.

  2. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    The Christian concept of God is just a small evolution from what Mesopotamians believed. It's just the sky father archetype in another form.

    The whole idea of God "doing" something is fucking retarded. It's just applying human actions to the supernatural, which is basically the same as saying humans are mini gods.

    As for "good" and "evil", there are no good or evil atoms, or good or evil trees. We are just cogs in various systems and end up in roles depending on societal supply and demand.

    Free will may exist, or it may not, we're ages away from solving this and fully understanding what consciousness actually is. Until then I guess we should assume we have it and that we can make a difference; not being apathetic, as it seems health to do so. However, there's no denying that as we approach the singularity of culture and thought due to an ever-connecting world, it may turn out that everything becomes highly predictable to the point of us not really having any free will.
    I personally think we're destined to become the neural network of the planet, which is in effect our lieutenant God in an all encompassing God, which is our universe.

  3. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Based

  4. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    If you only created people you knew would be good and go to Heaven, then is that really free will?

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      If you only created people you knew would be evil and go to hell, then is that really free will?
      Just because God does both doesn't mean there's free will.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        >If you only created people you knew would be evil and go to hell, then is that really free will?
        No, I wouldn't say it is.

  5. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    >Ask God for help
    >It happens
    Have you tried asking him to help you?

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, he didn't answer.

      How can you create something that doesn't have flaws? Creation is by its very nature flawed.
      [...]
      Try harder.

      If God is a perfect and omnipotent being then he could easily create something without flaws.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        Logically, how can something be created and not have flaws?

        >just kill yourself then
        >oh it's also a sin so you go to hell for doing it

        All Christian "morality" is basically disproven by the fact that no one was given the choice whether to exist and therefore it's immoral to punish them

        We are making a choice to continue existing by not killing ourselves.

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          Suicide is described as a sin, are you dense? Someone that chose not to exist would be punished for that choice

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          >Logically, how can something be created and not have flaws?
          Explain to me why does the act of creation necessarily entail flaw?

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            You can't have a composite without there being competition. Only if you make a massive homogenous blob can there be no "flaws".

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              >You can't have a composite without there being competition.
              Why not?
              > Only if you make a massive homogenous blob can there be no "flaws".
              So you CAN then? You can make the homogenous blob. That would be a perfect creation without flaws.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >why
                Because a force requires something to act against.
                >blob
                Sure. But we're not a blob. For what we are, God is providing perfect justice to us by offering us a chance at redemption while also acknowledging our flaws and fallenness. We are being judged as humans, not as angels or as a blob.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >God
                >providing
                >offering a chance
                >acknowledging
                >judging

                lmao, why an Earth would you assume God has the same verb-set as you do? How full of pride and utter arrogance must you be to think you share qualities with a God?

                Humans do not judge cells or atoms; they just are, just as we are mere cogs in systems of the divine. Claiming to understand the supernatural for your own politics is just deceitful.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Based on investigations we have made into the nature of the divine. Deists are just tards who refuse to investigate arguments for the attributes of God, much like agnostics are tards who refuse to engage with arguments for the existence of God.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                We're conducting lots of experiments, but we still don't really understand much. Here's a good start:
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
                Not sure how any Abrhamic text begins to help us understand the divine when the above questions are the ones needing answering.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                These are investigations into physical reality, not into psychological reality. Both are important.
                You don't feel unfree, do you? You psychologically know that you have free will. You're arguing only for arguments sake. Arguing against your own intuition.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                2000 years in the future, it's quite possible that we're all plugged into a predictable system and become the nervous system of the planet itself. At this,when all our behaviours are solved, I don't think we could call ourselves free.
                As such, our 'free will' is just dependent on the system in which we operate. If chaos exists, then we're free, if the systems have been solved, we're not.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                And we'll be judged according to our actions then. What's the issue? World's going to end in 217 lunisolar years max anyway.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Neither system is free going by your definition. Indeterminism gives you randomness, not the ability to choose. the only system that gives you free will is compatibilism, which essentially reinterprets "free will" as unrestricted autonomy.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                You just bolstered OP's point though.

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          Define flaws.

          >Yes, he didn't answer
          Because you didnt believe in him

          Why would I have talked to someone I didn't believe existed?

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            Whatever you define as a flaw. Any form of suffering, confusion, disease, distress. It's all a natural result of creation. Creation necessitates all these flaws.

            Suicide is described as a sin, are you dense? Someone that chose not to exist would be punished for that choice

            So, what if it's a sin? You are choosing to sin by not accepting God. How is that any better than suicide? It's far worse to live not accepting God.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              Completely empty argument, you do not solve the problem at all. If I created a child and tortured it just because it didn't worship me that would be considered immoral, so why can God do it?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                You worshipping God is not torture. It is not an unreasonable requirement. Forcing your kid to go to school for an hour a week isn't torture.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                I do not like this style of logic.
                >bro just base your life on fiction it's not a big deal it takes like no effort on your part

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              If God were omnipotent then he'd be capable of creating something without flaws.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                That something wouldn't be us. You're talking about God as a predicate, in terms of his attributes. In that sense, we cannot be other than ourselves by definition. We are flawed, and God judges us according to what we are, not what we could be.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        If that's the case then we should all kill each other collectively since nobody asked to be born.

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          According to you, your vengeful desert spirit will torture us for eternity if we kill ourselves.

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            >According to you, your vengeful desert spirit will torture us for eternity if we kill ourselves.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Yes, he didn't answer
        Because you didnt believe in him

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        >God
        >Create
        You're looking at God as some kind of Greek 'sky father' archetype, which is childish.
        God simply "is". 'Creation' and 'omnipotence' are incompatible, as the need for creation can only be possible if there's unrealised potential.

  6. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    >There are no possible choices other than the one God knows I'm going to make,
    Yes there are, for God to be omniscient it would also entail that He knows of all the options you DIDN'T take. God's omniscience doesn't negate free will, if anything it reinforces it. If I flip a coin and I ask you to choose heads or tails, knowing that you will choose heads, my foreknoweldge doesn't negate the choice that you did in fact take, it actually confirms that it was indeed your choice, otherwise I wouldn't be having that knowledge in the first place.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      >If I flip a coin and I ask you to choose heads or tails, knowing that you will choose heads, my foreknoweldge doesn't negate the choice that you did in fact take, it actually confirms that it was indeed your choice
      The difference is that you didn't create me, the coin, laws of physics and everything else.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        >The difference is that you didn't create me, the coin, laws of physics and everything else.
        So if it was your father, and your father minted the coin, would that have an effect to you then?

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          If my father was omniscient and actually created me instead of just shooting cum inside my mom, and if he also created the laws of physics, causality, logic and everything else, sure.
          Do you think my dad did that?

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            I can make a game and set rules on in, doens't mean that the outcome of each match is set by me. People play the game, follow the rules I set out, and the outcomes are completely dependant on their actions.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              And what if you create both the game and the players? What if you know what the result of each game between the players will be before either the game or the players are created?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                None of that would negate the agency of the players.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Massive cope. Compatibilism doesn't work if the whole world was created by some bearded incel who created (You) with a particular goal in mind and knowing exactly what you will do.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Precognition
                Is
                Not
                Predestination
                Get that tattooed in your forehead.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Not automatically, but it is when you created literally everything.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      >Yes there are, for God to be omniscient it would also entail that He knows of all the options you DIDN'T take
      But he also knows which one I will take. Knowing the others is irrelevant.
      >God's omniscience doesn't negate free will, if anything it reinforces it. If I flip a coin and I ask you to choose heads or tails, knowing that you will choose heads, my foreknoweldge doesn't negate the choice that you did in fact take, it actually confirms that it was indeed your choice, otherwise I wouldn't be having that knowledge in the first place.
      If your foreknowledge is absolutely infallible then it's not possible for me to have taken any other choice.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        >But he also knows which one I will take. Knowing the others is irrelevant.
        Right, He know that you made a choice, how can you say that you don't have free will if He has the knowledge that you made a choice? It's contradictory
        >If your foreknowledge is absolutely infallible then it's not possible for me to have taken any other choice.
        No? What effect does the infallibility of the knowldege of God has over your choice? It is possible that you could have made another choice, God knowing that doesn't negate that. Like I said, God would be aware of both the choices you didn't take as well as the one you did.

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          >Right, He know that you made a choice, how can you say that you don't have free will if He has the knowledge that you made a choice? It's contradictory
          The choice is illusory, I only think I'm making a choice because I'm ignorant of my future actions which have already taken place from God's perspective.
          >What effect does the infallibility of the knowldege of God has over your choice?
          God being infallible makes it impossible for anything other than what he knows to be true. In order to truly have free will I would have to be capable of proving God wrong.

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            >The choice is illusory,
            No it's not homosexual, you keep repeating this as a statement of fact, it's not. You COULD have made other choices, God knows this, but you didn't out of your own free will. God's foreknowledge has no effect on your decision making ability.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              How is it possible for me to do anything other than what God knows I'm going to do?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Precognition is not predestination. God didn't determine what your actions would be, He just knew what those actions would be, but He didn't decide it. At most you could say He determined the variables, but He let them play out on their own.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >God didn't determine what your actions would be, He just knew what those actions would be, but He didn't decide it.
                It doesn't matter if he decided it (he did, he created the world knowing exactly how it would all play out), it's not possible for the future to happen in any way other than the one that God knows will happen.
                You've done nothing to refute this.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Why would I need to refute this? This isn't a problem in the least. God knows what we will do. So what?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >it's not possible for the future to happen in any way other than the one that God knows will happen.
                Why the fuck not you retarded homosexual? You keep repeating this as if it were self-evident.

                It's fucking not, prove it.

                DO IT

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                If there were an omniscient God then such a being would have complete, infallible knowledge of absolutely everything past, present, and future.
                There would not be a single thing that such a God could not account for with 100% certainty at any moment in time and it's not possible for any of this knowledge to be incorrect (if it were then this being would not be omniscient).
                If such a being existed then there would be no possibility of anything happening which was not already known to it.
                I've layed it all out for you but I'm sure you'll just continue calling me names and asserting that I'm wrong instead of actually doing anything to counter my argument.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >If there were an omniscient God then such a being would have complete, infallible knowledge of absolutely everything past, present, and future.
                >There would not be a single thing that such a God could not account for with 100% certainty at any moment in time and it's not possible for any of this knowledge to be incorrect (if it were then this being would not be omniscient).
                >If such a being existed then there would be no possibility of anything happening which was not already known to it.
                Ok, none of these have any bearing on free will. It's all about knowldedge.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >it's not possible for any of this knowledge to be incorrect
                Doing something other than what God knows I'll do would require me to be able to prove infallible knowledge wrong, which isn't possible.

                Our present could be the universe being processed in real time, though. The future may be impossible to know, as it hasn't yet been processed.

                To know every permutation of everything would require more computing power than the total available in the system being calculated.

                >Our present could be the universe being processed in real time, though. The future may be impossible to know, as it hasn't yet been processed.
                This is the only coherent answer that could affirm both free will and omniscience.
                The problem is that most christians affirm God knowing the future.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                You would be right if it were looking at omniscience alone, but we're talking about omniscience paired up with omnipotence. The god wouldn't just be aware of what you're going to do, he would've created you with perfect knowledge of what you will do. He also could've created you otherwise - a person with the same name, but one who will do something slightly or very much different - but he chose this specific person to create, the one that is the current you.
                You can't compare that to some old hag who sees into the future.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Our present could be the universe being processed in real time, though. The future may be impossible to know, as it hasn't yet been processed.

                To know every permutation of everything would require more computing power than the total available in the system being calculated.

  7. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't Todd himself a Christian? Maybe not a fully devoted one but still.
    He put a lot of Christian references in Fallout 3

  8. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Look up "Block universe" or "Eternalism" on Google dot com. If you define "free will" the way you do in this post, modern science has already disproven free will so no need to worry about religion 🙂
    Obviously though this definition of free will is hogwash, though. Unless you grew up in a broken home, your parents can predict all your choices with near certainty anyway. Free will means the buck stops here. That nobody is responsible for your choices but you. Even if God knows you'd eventually choose to become a furry porn artist, you were still the one that made that choice. That decision happened in your brain, based off of what kind of person you are and what you decided was best for your life. It's not God's fault that you did that, even if he always knew you were a furry.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      Compatibilist free will destroys the commonly cited free will defense regarding the problem of evil.
      If you want to endorse compatibilism, you have to come up with some other theodicy, so good luck with that.

  9. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Posse peccare, posse non peccare.
    Non posse non peccare.
    Posse non peccare.
    Non posse peccare

  10. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Oh, I forgot to mention- his claim involved citing a website that advocates for intelligent design but claims it is a scientific-style website.

    Peace out fr now.

  11. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    >An omniscient God is incompatible with free will.

    Here's the awful truth, anon: A Christian God is the *only* way you're going to have free will.

    Because if there is no creator, if everything just evolved from the big bang, then those who argue for determinism surely have the better of the argument.* Likewise if there's a creator which is less than omniscient/omnipotent. For such a creator's creation would be subject to the same logic of determinism as non-theistic evolution.

    The *only* way there's any hope of free will is if the Creator is the God of the Bible, who created man in His own image and likeness. For that God grants us free will as a gift. Absent that gift, our minds would be as determined and unfree as the mind of a fish or a beaver.

    *See: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      >argues via the stanford encyclopedia of philosophy
      >never heard of compatibilism
      They're not sending their best.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Compatibilism
        >basically you have free will, but you can only do actions that are within the realm of possibility for human beings
        So, free will.

        >if you want to argue this you have to deny that you even made a choice, not that you couldn't have made any other choice
        That's my point, it only appears to me like I made a choice because I'm ignorant of the future and couldn't tell that the things that seemed like possibilities weren't actually possible.

        >if im not omniscient, then nobody is

        Dude, I'm not asking why free will is incompatible with determinism.
        I'm asking how 'your Catholic faith' makes free will a thing

        Say determinism is false, but atheism is true. Is there a reason we cannot have free will on atheism?

        Determinism is for cucks, there’s nobody that truly thinks they have no free will. It’s an argumentative stance to be taken purely as a challenge to the existence of god.
        >if I had free will, and there is a god, then god must be responsible for every action I’ve taken
        >thus, there can be no free will
        >on the other hand, I have free will to not believe in a god, and to do things that would otherwise be considered sinful
        Free will is the basic truth, and theism isn’t mutually exclusive with it. You can have free will and be and atheist, but atheism is foolish.

        >Although probably not conclusive, in my view, I think the argument for determinism is a pretty strong argument.
        You mean incompatibilism, right?
        Most philosophers are compatibilists fyi. It's even become a bit of a meme that normies and new philosophy students either don't get or don't like compatibilism, and accepting at least that compatibilism is a respectable position is a kind of philosophical coming of age.

        [...]
        >incompatibilism

        I'm pretty sure we were on the page libertarian free will, which I don't understand and think is nonsense.
        I just want to know how God makes it a thing, and why it's incompatible with atheism (not determinism).

        Mind - determinism = libertarian free will
        ?
        I think you want to say there's more to it than that

        -isms and appeals to authority

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          >Determinism is for cucks
          So you don't believe in a God that knows what you are gonna do?

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            God (archetypal omniscient being, could be anything) knows what you will do, even if you don’t know until you make the decision
            This (

            The answer is very simple. The future doesn't exist in reality. It's merely a concept used to describe an unpredictable state of being. Humans estimate about the future based on the current trajectory of information, and with perfect knowledge there is a great chance of correct estimation, yet the inability to determine specific random factors on a small scale often have huge ramifications for the outcome.
            God's omniscience could easily work the same way- He has a working knowledge of all that Is, and this gives him an immensely powerful model for predicting the future, but as the future is not a thing which exists but a description of a state of being, it is not required to fulfill the criteria of omniscience.
            "The Future" isn't real. It's just a way we describe the difference between reality and our predictive models after the fact.
            Not christian btw lol

            ) anon explains it well: “knowing” the future is basically having the perfect/unlimited/most powerful capacity to predict what will happen. Knowing what will happen doesn’t make its occurrence dependent on the subject knowing about it. For example, if you knew a train was supposed to arrive at a certain time, you don’t become the god of trains.

            you have free will, but you can only do actions that are within the realm of possibility for human beings
            >So, free will.
            >Determinism is for cucks, there’s nobody that truly thinks they have no free will.
            Bruh what? Compatibilism is the stance that free will and determinism are compatible.

            Cope

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              >cope
              What cope? I'm just saying that you don't even know what compatibility means.
              And yeah I know that you're gonna say "muh argument from authority" or some other similar crap, but almost everyone in the field sees shitting on compatibilism as extremely low IQ even if they're in the minority that doesn't accept compatibilism.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                It’s a cop out. It’s middle ground cope, like “since neither side is 100% correct/determinable, then we must accept both as kinda correct”
                >yeah we have free will, but the range to which we can express this free will is limited by a deterministic environment (including individual internal states)
                On an impossibly massive and inconsequential scale, then compatibilism makes sense. But this is not an answer to anything. Basically, you’re saying free will exists (non-determinist), but the foreknowledge of the resultant actions (determinist) can be known, though it’s just impossible to do so. It’s a hypothetical cope

                >but almost everyone in the field sees shitting on compatibilism as extremely low IQ
                Knowing that you’re pleading to authority doesn’t make your pleas to authority any less fallacious

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >It’s middle ground cope, like “since neither side is 100% correct/determinable, then we must accept both as kinda correct
                Is this what compatibilists believe?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                You're completely wrong about compatibilism. There is absolutely zero non-deterministic factors within compatibilism. You're trying to make it out to be some weird limited form of libertarian free will, but that's not what it is.

                >It’s middle ground cope, like “since neither side is 100% correct/determinable, then we must accept both as kinda correct
                Is this what compatibilists believe?

                Of course it's not, anon just refuses to read up on what compatibilism means.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              So what? If God knows the future with a 100% certainty, I cannot make a choice. There is only 1 option.
              What's even your definition of choice/free will at this point? (the ability to have done otherwise - not gonna work)

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >have choices
                >make a choice
                >wait someone knew i would do this?
                >I had no choice

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                You are a compatibilist

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                You're completely wrong about compatibilism. There is absolutely zero non-deterministic factors within compatibilism. You're trying to make it out to be some weird limited form of libertarian free will, but that's not what it is.
                [...]
                Of course it's not, anon just refuses to read up on what compatibilism means.

                It’s basically hindsight bias
                >free will to take action
                >but looking back, that action was the only logical outcome given all the information in a system
                >verification: the action in question did in fact occur, so the math checks out that the system’s status would bring about that action
                >conclusion: there is no free will because the logic to predict that action exists but we just can’t know it until after it happens
                You used non-determinism to get into the conundrum, and then used determinism to get out of it.
                Free will is real, determinism is theoretical. If you knew that you had no choice in anything, then nothing changes in terms of your capacity to make decisions. Like this anon,

                >have "choices"
                >make a "choice"
                >wait someone knew i would do this?
                >I had no other choice

                , determinism is just a meme to escape accountability by saying every option was just an illusion.

                >take a test
                >multiple choice
                >get question wrong
                >teacher must’ve known I would get it wrong, so they put wrong choices for me to make
                >why didn’t they just put only the right answer?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                No you fucking retard, what you are describing is not compatibilism.
                You are a prime example of why compatibilism is used as a pleb filter in academic philosophy.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >ugh you don’t understand the subtleties of my mental gymnastics, because if you did then you would automatically know that this belief is correct (this belief, btw, is not conclusive; it just puts two mutually exclusive ideas together)
                >you are not speaking in jargon
                >you must not have a logical opinion
                >opinion discarded
                Dogmatic, worshiping at the altar of “academia”
                All you’re saying is “your free will can also be expressed as the result of a deterministic system”
                So basically, just free will, with the capacity to judge it post posteriori

                Just tell us what you mean by free will and choices already
                apparently they are compatible with there being only 1 option on the multiple choice test

                Free will = conscious experience of being able to make decisions

                God above all, atheists want to determinism as a segue into moral relativism, and that’s cringe

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >Free will = conscious experience of being able to make decisions
                this is, compatible, with compatibilism
                retard

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks, you keep proving my point about compatibilism filtering retards to the point that they don't even understand what it means.
                Maybe next you can call academic philosophers israelite, that would be fun.

                How does this relate to the OP saying the existence of god is incompatible with free will? Compatibilism is just a descriptor!

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Well, I'm talking to an incompatibilist, who don't really understand anything

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                There are two approaches to solving the problem in the OP: compatibilist (deterministic) free will and libertarian free will.
                Compatibilist free will tends to have more support among secular people, but it's also a common stance among, for example, Calvinists. For the religious, compatibilism solves the free will issue with a triomni god, but its downside is that it makes the problem of evil more difficult to tackle. This is why people sometimes call Calvin's god a monster.
                Libertarian will is more common among religious people in general. The upside is that it allows you to apply the free will defense to the problem of evil, but the downside is that it's harder to justify libertarian free will in the presence of a triomni god.
                There you go, that's why it's relevant. It's one of the two possible replies to the answer in OP and it has different consequences than the libertarian one.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks, you keep proving my point about compatibilism filtering retards to the point that they don't even understand what it means.
                Maybe next you can call academic philosophers israelite, that would be fun.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Other poster was right about the low IQ think, btw

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Just tell us what you mean by free will and choices already
                apparently they are compatible with there being only 1 option on the multiple choice test

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >have "choices"
                >make a "choice"
                >wait someone knew i would do this?
                >I had no other choice

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >If God knows the future with a 100% certainty, I cannot make a choice.

                Nope.

                You accept on faith that God knows the future with 100% certainty.

                Why wouldn't you accept on faith that God has given you free will?

                Both propositions are derived from the same source -- faith. If you're going to accept the one -- which, if you think about it, requires a *huge* leap of faith -- then why not accept the other?

                Be consistent. It's verges on being willfully perverse to accept the one faith proposition - which, by accepting it, effectively makes you *lose* faith in God - and not accept the other, corollary faith proposition. The two things are inextricably intertwined.

                As Thomas More said:
                >God made the angels to show Him splendor, as He made animals for innocence and plants for their simplicity.
                >But Man He made to serve Him wittily, in the tangle of his mind.

                Or, as a more recent commentator puts it:

                God created us out of love and He gave us the ability to freely love in return.

                Love that is not freely given is not true love. God's love for us is true.

                He gives us free will so we can have the freedom to choose to truly love Him back (or not).

                Believe this, anon, because it is more true and more fundamental than everything else, because "God is love."

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                No.
                I don't think God is real. You(?) do.
                This is a critique against people who believe in a god that knows the future, and in free will.
                If your god is some kind of dumbass that don't know what will happen, never mind.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >I don't think God is real.
                Okay, fair enough. (I'm the Catholic who's been posting.)

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              lol, people say compatibilism is determinism in denial... Look at this guy, his "free will" is compatibilism in denial

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          you have free will, but you can only do actions that are within the realm of possibility for human beings
          >So, free will.
          >Determinism is for cucks, there’s nobody that truly thinks they have no free will.
          Bruh what? Compatibilism is the stance that free will and determinism are compatible.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      what special powers do the Christian God bring that allows for free will?

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        It's called omnipotence, kiddo.

        • 4 days ago
          Anonymous

          I take omnipotence to be the ability to do anything which is logically possible, free will is not logically possible

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            >I take omnipotence to be the ability to do anything which is logically possible, free will is not logically possible.

            I disagree, of course. Even granting that in a godless universe free will seems unlikely, the gift of free will by God to His human creature hardly entails a logical contradiction.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              >free will hardly entails a logical contradiction.
              Then why you need some weird omnipotence superpower to have it?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                That's what I believe, looking at the matter from my perspective as a Catholic.

                I've always liked this remark from the writer Flannery O'Connor:
                “Does one’s integrity ever lie in what he is not able to do? I think that usually it does, for free will does not mean one will, but many wills conflicting in one man. Freedom cannot be conceived simply. It is a mystery...”

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Did you have a reason for why you believe that? Or maybe an argument why you can't have free will without God's superpowers

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >Did you have a reason for why you believe that?
                It's an inference I draw from my Catholic faith, on the one hand, and familiarity with the argument for determinism on the other.

                >Or maybe an argument why you can't have free will without God's superpowers
                I would refer you to the above Stanford link. (There's a long article in on that site about compatibilism, too, if that interests you.) Although probably not conclusive, in my view, I think the argument for determinism is a pretty strong argument. ymmv.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Dude, I'm not asking why free will is incompatible with determinism.
                I'm asking how 'your Catholic faith' makes free will a thing

                Say determinism is false, but atheism is true. Is there a reason we cannot have free will on atheism?

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >I'm asking how 'your Catholic faith' makes free will a thing
                Because the Catholic Church believes and teaches that the human person has free will:

                >Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or
                that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one's own responsibility. By free will one
                shapes one's own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and
                goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.
                Catholic Catechism, paragraph 1731

                Catholics have thought a lot about this because the question of free will bears a close relationship to the operation of God's grace in the human person.

                >Say determinism is false, but atheism is true. Is there a reason we cannot have free will on atheism?

                Free will would seem to follow from, or at least would be consistent with those premises.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Ahhh, then you are probably still not this guy

                >An omniscient God is incompatible with free will.

                Here's the awful truth, anon: A Christian God is the *only* way you're going to have free will.

                Because if there is no creator, if everything just evolved from the big bang, then those who argue for determinism surely have the better of the argument.* Likewise if there's a creator which is less than omniscient/omnipotent. For such a creator's creation would be subject to the same logic of determinism as non-theistic evolution.

                The *only* way there's any hope of free will is if the Creator is the God of the Bible, who created man in His own image and likeness. For that God grants us free will as a gift. Absent that gift, our minds would be as determined and unfree as the mind of a fish or a beaver.

                *See: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/

                I've been trying to draw out the supposed contradiction between atheism and free will

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >Ahhh, then you are probably still not this guy

                >An omniscient God is incompatible with free will.

                Here's the awful truth, anon: A Christian God is the *only* way you're going to have free will.

                Because if there is no creator, if everything just evolved from the big bang, then those who argue for determinism surely have the better of the argument.* Likewise if there's a creator which is less than omniscient/omnipotent. For such a creator's creation would be subject to the same logic of determinism as non-theistic evolution.

                The *only* way there's any hope of free will is if the Creator is the God of the Bible, who created man in His own image and likeness. For that God grants us free will as a gift. Absent that gift, our minds would be as determined and unfree as the mind of a fish or a beaver.

                *See: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/

                Right, I'm not him.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >Although probably not conclusive, in my view, I think the argument for determinism is a pretty strong argument.
                You mean incompatibilism, right?
                Most philosophers are compatibilists fyi. It's even become a bit of a meme that normies and new philosophy students either don't get or don't like compatibilism, and accepting at least that compatibilism is a respectable position is a kind of philosophical coming of age.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >You mean incompatibilism, right?
                I meant this link: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/

                >Most philosophers are compatibilists fyi.
                Okay, but it seems that what compatibilists call "free will" would not necessarily be free will in the OP's sense, because even if one's *motivation* was not free (i.e., if it was determined) a compatibilist would still hold that the ability to act according to one's motivation would be an act of free will. Stated otherwise, although the *choice* was not coerced, and thus was free according to the compatibilist, in fact the choice *was* determined if the motivation was determined. Or as Schoppy would have it: "Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills." To my mind, that's a pretty dubious version of "free will," but ymmv.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                That's a decent rundown, but I think compatibilism is actually applicable to the OP in certain faiths. Afaik Calvinists are compatibilists.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, I don't get it.
                I think a choice is free if it's uncoerced, like nobody holding a gun to my head.
                Not that it's uncaused. There is going to be a cause/reason explaining why I chose A rather than B

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                >Although probably not conclusive, in my view, I think the argument for determinism is a pretty strong argument.
                You mean incompatibilism, right?
                Most philosophers are compatibilists fyi. It's even become a bit of a meme that normies and new philosophy students either don't get or don't like compatibilism, and accepting at least that compatibilism is a respectable position is a kind of philosophical coming of age.

                >incompatibilism

                I'm pretty sure we were on the page libertarian free will, which I don't understand and think is nonsense.
                I just want to know how God makes it a thing, and why it's incompatible with atheism (not determinism).

                Mind - determinism = libertarian free will
                ?
                I think you want to say there's more to it than that

  12. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    There's always a counter-argument, albeit a thin one in this case.

  13. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    [...]
    Oh, I forgot to mention- his claim involved citing a website that advocates for intelligent design but claims it is a scientific-style website.

    Peace out fr now.

    This mass replier is conflating sentience with sapience, and he is making sure everyone knows how confused he is

  14. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    >here are no possible choices other than the one God knows I'm going to make
    you still made the choice retard. if you want to argue this you have to deny that you even made a choice, not that you couldn't have made any other choice. of course you can have free will and still not be able to make any other choice than the one you did, otherwise you would violate causality. If it's your own nature that leads you to making a choice, then making another choice would require you to have a different nature, thus that was the only choice you could have made. Yet you still made the choice from yourself.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      >if you want to argue this you have to deny that you even made a choice, not that you couldn't have made any other choice
      That's my point, it only appears to me like I made a choice because I'm ignorant of the future and couldn't tell that the things that seemed like possibilities weren't actually possible.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      How do you justify the existence of evil?

  15. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    >If God knows the future and can't be wrong then it's not possible for the future to be anything other than what god knows it will be, therefor we can't do anything other than what God knows we're going to do.

    ....it's why He's giving you all the chance and opportunity to choose correctly NOW while you have all the chance and opportunity in the world to. Even giving you an entire book of rules and guidelines to abide by 2000+ years in advance on top of grace and mercy.

    You can't possibly fuck this up. But knowing YOUR rebellious - animalistic ass ways, more likely you will.

    2000 fucking years in advance.... 2000! Even sending a holy guy who SHOWS you step-by-step how to live a righteous and holy lifestyle according to how He expects you to live. It's not that He's incompatible with freewill. It's the fact that you CHOOSE to be a compulsive fuck up on purpose, and then blame religion for not being fair about it.

  16. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    The answer is very simple. The future doesn't exist in reality. It's merely a concept used to describe an unpredictable state of being. Humans estimate about the future based on the current trajectory of information, and with perfect knowledge there is a great chance of correct estimation, yet the inability to determine specific random factors on a small scale often have huge ramifications for the outcome.
    God's omniscience could easily work the same way- He has a working knowledge of all that Is, and this gives him an immensely powerful model for predicting the future, but as the future is not a thing which exists but a description of a state of being, it is not required to fulfill the criteria of omniscience.
    "The Future" isn't real. It's just a way we describe the difference between reality and our predictive models after the fact.
    Not christian btw lol

  17. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Knowledge does not equate to causality.
    >its not possible for that choice to be anything but what god knows
    it is, and god would know differently.
    Can you prove knowing something will happen necessitates its happening?

  18. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >there’s nobody that truly thinks they have no free will
    Compatibilists* think they have free will, dumbass

  19. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Just say (God gibben) souls have some sort of special causal power, it's literally that easy

  20. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Physics already disproved free will and philosophically it never had any solid framework to begin with. You can kill free will without including God to begin with.

  21. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    >I do not have the option to do anything other than what God knows I'll do.
    this is the flaw in your reasoning. you DO have the option. you just don't choose the other options.

    • 4 days ago
      Anonymous

      >you have other options
      >you just NEVER choose them

      Can you explain the difference between this, and not having the options?

  22. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Your definitions of free will are odd. "Free will does not mean that man may do whatever he wants, but the ability to do what needs to be done."

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *