Oh no not another free will thread.

[Edwardo Piet]

How would this question be answered?

The question there was rhetorical. If the universe is in exactly one state then all the causes are the same so you will do exactly the same thing for exactly the same reasons. To change the outcome you have to change the causal universe. This is all assuming determinism is true, remember. That's why we're talking about a being knowing the future, because it's another way of thinking about the same sort of thing.

As for indeterminism, then the answer is even simpler. If it's not determined... you didn't determine it.

---

I think I get what Lut is saying. The concept that you chose what you wanted to, but it's also what's predicted. The god or whatever may know what you would do, but it didn't make you do anything. But maybe Khem and Hammy are seeing this purely through what the possible outcomes are.

Sort of.  An impediment to free will, the freedom to choose, means that there is no choice whatsoever.  There is always a choice, however, for there is no instance in any moment of our daily lives where we don't have the option to choose what we are going to do or say or act or behave or wear or drink or eat.  A being knowing what we will do in no way cancels out free will.  Rather, it probably reinforces it.

You do get the concept that a choice requires more than one possible outcome though, right? If the only thing that you can possibly do is X... what kind of choice is that?

If a being knows with absolute certainty that you will do X... how could you do Y?

---

He doesn't have to make you do anything though. It just means that because he knows you will do it, you will do it.

Which alone does not cancel out free will.

If there are no alternative outcomes and you have no alternative options, where's the free will? A choice between A and B is a choice. A choice between A, B and C is a choice. A choice between A and A is not a choice.