Posts: 10826
Threads: 29
Joined: December 8, 2019
Reputation:
14
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 8:55 am
The idea to have free will there must be a choice of evil is absurd. There is no reason being couldn't have a choice but could only conceive of doing good acts and be incapable of conceiving of doing evil ones. So the idea of evil is necessary or that it somehow gives Christianity an out on the problem of evil is simply a pipe dream. As is the absurdity that it's not a contradiction for a good god to allow evil to exist.
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
![[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.shopify.com%2Fs%2Ffiles%2F1%2F0630%2F5310%2F3332%2Fproducts%2FCanada_Flag.jpg%3Fv%3D1646203843)
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Posts: 1159
Threads: 2
Joined: October 10, 2013
Reputation:
10
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 10:12 am
When, if there is a god, does it give humans free will?
Ask a xian that question
No one has the free will to be created or not into a world that this god put satan in charge of.
No one has the free will where in the world to be born in.
No one has free will to what parents it decides to force you birth.
At what stage does god grant free will
Posts: 8709
Threads: 128
Joined: March 1, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 10:23 am
(November 1, 2022 at 8:55 am)Helios Wrote: The idea to have free will there must be a choice of evil is absurd. There is no reason being couldn't have a choice but could only conceive of doing good acts and be incapable of conceiving of doing evil ones. So the idea of evil is necessary or that it somehow gives Christianity an out on the problem of evil is simply a pipe dream. As is the absurdity that it's not a contradiction for a good god to allow evil to exist.
If there can be only one perfect being, in the Scholastic sense, then by necessity all other being would be imperfect and subject to privation of some good. That is not absurd. It is supremely sensible. Also, within the Scholastic tradition, which underpins Catholic dogma, freewill seems to be defined more in terms of an individual's desire and ability to manifest good in their lives when presented with the opportunity and not so much about isolated decisions.
<insert profound quote here>
Posts: 10826
Threads: 29
Joined: December 8, 2019
Reputation:
14
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 10:40 am
Nope still absurd
1. There is no reason there has to be only one perfect being in any sense
2. A imperfect being could still only make good decisions and be totally incapable of evil
3. There is no contradiction about good desires and good manifestations without the capacity to conceive or commit evil
So no it is absurd and not in the slightest sensible 
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Posts: 8037
Threads: 47
Joined: September 12, 2015
Reputation:
41
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 10:56 am
In monotheistic religions, the idea of free will breaks down because it cannot exist where a god is either omniscient or omnipotent*. For polytheistic religions, this is generally not the case because believers accept that their gods are limited.
*The abrahamic religions would argue that their god is both, but that's a logical impossibility.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Posts: 7259
Threads: 506
Joined: December 12, 2015
Reputation:
22
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 12:00 pm
(November 1, 2022 at 10:23 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: (November 1, 2022 at 8:55 am)Helios Wrote: The idea to have free will there must be a choice of evil is absurd. There is no reason being couldn't have a choice but could only conceive of doing good acts and be incapable of conceiving of doing evil ones. So the idea of evil is necessary or that it somehow gives Christianity an out on the problem of evil is simply a pipe dream. As is the absurdity that it's not a contradiction for a good god to allow evil to exist.
If there can be only one perfect being, in the Scholastic sense, then by necessity all other being would be imperfect and subject to privation of some good. That is not absurd. It is supremely sensible. Also, within the Scholastic tradition, which underpins Catholic dogma, freewill seems to be defined more in terms of an individual's desire and ability to manifest good in their lives when presented with the opportunity and not so much about isolated decisions.
Free will means that "it could have been otherwise", hence, we can impute moral responsibility to others based upon their choices, or, so the argument goes.
The scientific evidence is that we "choose" certain actions prior to even be conscious of our "choices", which is not at all "supremely sensible".
Posts: 44051
Threads: 529
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 12:05 pm
(This post was last modified: November 1, 2022 at 12:05 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
(November 1, 2022 at 10:23 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: (November 1, 2022 at 8:55 am)Helios Wrote: The idea to have free will there must be a choice of evil is absurd. There is no reason being couldn't have a choice but could only conceive of doing good acts and be incapable of conceiving of doing evil ones. So the idea of evil is necessary or that it somehow gives Christianity an out on the problem of evil is simply a pipe dream. As is the absurdity that it's not a contradiction for a good god to allow evil to exist.
If there can be only one perfect being, in the Scholastic sense, then by necessity all other being would be imperfect and subject to privation of some good. That is not absurd. It is supremely sensible. Also, within the Scholastic tradition, which underpins Catholic dogma, freewill seems to be defined more in terms of an individual's desire and ability to manifest good in their lives when presented with the opportunity and not so much about isolated decisions.
How does being imperfect require the privation of some good? In the thought experiment above, the good people left in the world are not required to be perfect, just good enough to never commit an evil act.
The ‘desire and ability’ definition doesn’t work, for reasons already stated: for free will to be operative, God would need to be less than perfect. Sure you want to go there?
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 66329
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 3:43 pm
(This post was last modified: November 1, 2022 at 3:45 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Consider the framing. Some people think that bad acts, evil acts, no less... are so compelling that they'd have to be perfect to avoid them. Let it sink in.
Anywho, you can make free will or a god work, and work together, so long as you don't mind damaging one or both of those ideas in the process. That's not really saying much, since there's no conceivable statement that can't have identical work done to it, even directly and explicitly antithetical ones.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 44051
Threads: 529
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 3:57 pm
(This post was last modified: November 1, 2022 at 3:58 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
(November 1, 2022 at 3:43 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Consider the framing. Some people think that bad acts, evil acts, no less... are so compelling that they'd have to be perfect to avoid them. Let it sink in.
Anywho, you can make free will or a god work, and work together, so long as you don't mind damaging one or both of those ideas in the process. That's not really saying much, since there's no conceivable statement that can't have identical work done to it, even directly and explicitly antithetical ones.
I wonder which of God’s omni qualities Christians would be willing to weaken in order to make free will work (at least in the Aquinan sense).
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 8709
Threads: 128
Joined: March 1, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Free will and the necessary evil
November 1, 2022 at 5:09 pm
(November 1, 2022 at 12:00 pm)Jehanne Wrote: (November 1, 2022 at 10:23 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: If there can be only one perfect being, in the Scholastic sense, then by necessity all other being would be imperfect and subject to privation of some good. That is not absurd. It is supremely sensible. Also, within the Scholastic tradition, which underpins Catholic dogma, freewill seems to be defined more in terms of an individual's desire and ability to manifest good in their lives when presented with the opportunity and not so much about isolated decisions.
Free will means that "it could have been otherwise", hence, we can impute moral responsibility to others based upon their choices, or, so the argument goes.
The scientific evidence is that we "choose" certain actions prior to even be conscious of our "choices", which is not at all "supremely sensible".
That is one definition of free will, libertarian free will, a modern philosophical one. My point only applied to theologies based on Scholastic foundations.
<insert profound quote here>
|
