Theists: How can predetermined fate and free will coexist?

[Asmodee]

Ah, such heady conversations in this thread. So many ways people are trying to get around predetermined destiny when the future is known and, thus, set.

Let's look at multiple timelines briefly and say they're a factor. God either A, does not know which one will come to pass and is, thus, not all-knowing or B, does know which one will be "the" timeline once the future becomes the present and eventually the past, in which case multiple timelines become irrelevant because while there are technically multiple "possibilities", in each and every case one is an eventuality, the others will remain forever unfulfilled. So while multiple timelines would be "possible" from our perspective they are either "impossible" from the perspective of a god or that god is not "all knowing". Remember, when it's all said and done and it has become the past, there is only one timeline. Possible branches are not part of the past from any given perspective. What that means is that they don't technically exist at all. At no point in the past, present or future do any unfulfilled "possibilities" exist. Multiple timelines are an abstract, not a reality by any measure.

Jehovah's Witnesses get around this by saying that God COULD know the future, but he "chooses not to". The problem with that is that God is still not "all knowing". All powerful, yes, but if he chooses not to know something then he is not all-knowing. Another problem with that is, of course, that it's simply made up to get around a problem with no supporting evidence to suggest that it's true.

So we are right back to square one. If any entity in the universe knows what is coming with perfect knowledge that thing becomes unavoidable, destiny, fate. Even if that entity chooses not to know the fact that it is knowable makes it fate. It can't be knowable unless it is destined to happen.

[henryp]

Ah, such heady conversations in this thread.  So many ways people are trying to get around predetermined destiny when the future is known and, thus, set.

Let's look at multiple timelines briefly and say they're a factor. 

It's not multiple timelines.  It's a single timeline that an actor is able to traverse non-linearly.

[Tonus]

That's pretty wild, though. Let's say there is a single timeline and God can view it from end to end. Have all of the events actually happened? What if he steps in and makes a change and other changes ripple outward and make big changes in the timeline. Certain events that happened in version 1 do not happen in version 2. Did they "un-happen"?

Huh. Who needs hard drugs when you have timeline theory...

[henryp]

That's pretty wild, though.  Let's say there is a single timeline and God can view it from end to end.  Have all of the events actually happened?  What if he steps in and makes a change and other changes ripple outward and make big changes in the timeline.  Certain events that happened in version 1 do not happen in version 2.  Did they "un-happen"?

Huh.  Who needs hard drugs when you have timeline theory...

If there's one timeline, I guess God's interference would already be a part of that one timeline?  There would never have been a timeline that didn't include his interference?  There is no stepping out of the timeline, looking at it, and fidgeting with things.  It would all just be, His actions included, from the start. I guess from God's perspective, it would all come into existence simultaneously, with his actions also being simultaneous since God isn't operating 'in time'?  

The trick with someone theoretically acting outside of time, is that their behavior wouldn't have the first I do X, then I do Y in whatever that place would be.  Everything just is?  I don't know.  Like you said, hard drugs.  I was only prepared for envelope questions.

[Asmodee]

That's pretty wild, though.  Let's say there is a single timeline and God can view it from end to end.  Have all of the events actually happened?  What if he steps in and makes a change and other changes ripple outward and make big changes in the timeline.  Certain events that happened in version 1 do not happen in version 2.  Did they "un-happen"?

Huh.  Who needs hard drugs when you have timeline theory...

If there's one timeline, I guess God's interference would already be a part of that one timeline?  There would never have been a timeline that didn't include his interference?  There is no stepping out of the timeline, looking at it, and fidgeting with things.  It would all just be, His actions included, from the start.  I guess from God's perspective, it would all come into existence simultaneously, with his actions also being simultaneous since God isn't operating 'in time'?    

The trick with someone theoretically acting outside of time, is that their behavior wouldn't have the first I do X, then I do Y in whatever that place would be.  Everything just is?  I don't know.  Like you said, hard drugs.  I was only prepared for envelope questions.

Obviously if God created time she would not be effected by it, which is impossible for us.  Any way we could "imagine" that worked would be just that, our imaginations and, thus, pure speculation with no data or experience to back it.

That being said, working "outside of time", I would imagine none of it happened, and all of it, depending on how you want to look at it.  Any changes made would be like a project we were working on.  What "happened", what it "became" was what we made of it.  Anything else was an unfulfilled possibility.

Think of it like a train route on a computer simulation.  The track has a beginning and an end, all of time, and the track branches off many times, which we control from the screen.  That's the possibilities.  Our screen shows the path the train will take when it's set in motion.  Once the train has traversed the track, that's the path, the "timeline".  All the un-taken paths are unfulfilled possibilities that never were.  They aren't branches in the timeline, just possible paths, most of which the train doesn't take.  We choose the path, it is instantly laid out on the screen and that is how the train will travel.  That's what I imagine it would be like.  A god could see all the possibilities, but there would only be one "reality", one path taken, one "actuality".  There would be no changing anything "after the fact" because, as a god, there would be no "after the fact", no "before the fact".  For us, it would be as if, once the path were set, the train instantly traverses the path we laid out.  It's done in a flash.  We set the path and that path was taken.  If we then want to change the path, we simply do it and the new path is the one that "was taken".  The "path" is a simulation to us, so far removed from our own reality that changing it is irrelevant.  It doesn't effect us in the least.  It doesn't effect the world around us.  It only changes what we see on the screen, instantly, as if all previous settings never happened.

But, of course, as an all-knowing god we would never make changes once we've set our path.  We would have already chosen the perfect path.  There would be no need for "tweaking" because to tweak it to say, "I didn't get it quite right".  Not possible for a perfect being.  The one thing a perfect being would be incapable of doing would be to make a mistake.

You are looking at it from the perspective of being affected by the timeline.  From our perspective, no, there would never have been a timeline which did not include God's interference.  From her perspective, the thought is insignificant, even irrelevant.  It's the path that's always been, the path she designed.  And, in fact, interference would be unnecessary.  She would not need to tweak things at specific points in the simulation.  She would simply design the simulation to work the way she wanted from the beginning, so that it didn't need tweaking for any reason because that's how you do things when you have complete control.  You don't make work for yourself, you build it right the first time and it just does as it was designed to do, exactly what you want.

Finally, the "actor", in this case God, would not need to "traverse" the timeline at all.  She has always seen it in its entirety, capable of changing anything without directly "traversing" it just as we change a simulation without "stepping into" the simulation.  In this case pure will would shape it as desired, and the shape would be perfect from beginning to end, no "tweaking" necessary.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I have an idea!

Let's stop debating and have a Dr Who marathon!

[RoadRunner79]

I have an idea!

Let's stop debating and have a Dr Who marathon!

Can't one have both?

[Asmodee]

I have an idea!

Let's stop debating and have a Dr Who marathon!

Genius!

[Asmodee]

So, let's say I build a time machine and then I let it sit for 1 hour before using it. During that time I leave it in a locked room, completely unobserved. When the hour is up I open the room, get into the machine and immediately go back in time 1/2 hour and destroy the past time machine I left sitting unobserved. Would I still win the Nobel?

[robvalue]

Possible definitions for a "free choice":

1) My choice cannot be predicted beforehand

2) Given a replay with an identical scenario, it is possible for me to take alternative action

I won't hold too much with 1 as it is also question begging in a sense, although I think it's a sound definition.

Let's look at 2. We have the scenario where, in a certain reality, I'm about to make a choice. Let's say for simplicity I'm about to choose a number between 1 and 10.

Let's also say precognition is possible. So it is previously knowable, at all points before this decision is made, that I will pick the number X. What number do I pick? I pick the number X, of course.

Now let's recreate this exact scenario again. The reality is the same. The precognition is the same. As before, it's knowable that I will pick X. What do I pick? X again. I can't pick anything else.

Replay it as many times as you like; I can't take another course of action without changing the scenario.

Some people will probably try to argue that the precognition information isn't part of the scenario. I'd say it certainly is. If the precognition information is different, then the scenario is different. It's a different reality, on a different pre-programmed arc. And in that different scenario, I'd again only have one choice.

But in the single run through that we are assumed to have, if there's possible precognition, all we have is a list of events that will happen, and no amount of trying to choose can vary from it. So no real choices are being made. All these arguments that both can exist seem to involve the prediction being unstated, or even changing, to match what happens. This is entirely in reverse as to what precognition actually means.

I'd also like to know how the information can previously exist as to what selection I will make, from 1 to 10, if I have a free choice. "Magic" isn't acceptable to me. I haven't chosen yet. I can pick any number. Am I predictable, or not?