Catholic_Lady, I think you would be wrong if you tried to explain that because it attacks the conclusion of the following argument and not the premise.
1. To choose freely, there has to be more then one possible outcome to choose from.
2. If future is known, only the known future is the possible outcome.
Therefore if future is known, to choose freely is impossible.
What Luntrinae did was attack the conclusion. And just deny it.
You can't do that to an argument. You have to attack the reasons.
1. To choose freely, there has to be more then one possible outcome to choose from.
2. If future is known, only the known future is the possible outcome.
Therefore if future is known, to choose freely is impossible.
What Luntrinae did was attack the conclusion. And just deny it.
You can't do that to an argument. You have to attack the reasons.
