(September 1, 2012 at 11:05 pm)spockrates Wrote: But regarding the voting illustration, please explain how it is analogous to omniscience and freewill. I'm not sure I see the connection, yet.
(September 1, 2012 at 11:01 pm)idunno Wrote: Theological discussions are fine by me.
However I don't think one needs to go that route to refute Theological Fatalism. All that is required is to show that the principle of alternative possibilities isn't necessary for free will.
Well, I'm not trying to refute anyone, except perhaps myself! I am trying to understand why others believe and question why they believe to see if why they believe is why I should question why I believe so that I might believe why they believe, too.
But please elaborate on why alternative possibilities are unnecessary for one to be free. Or perhaps it will help if I give a simple example and you explain how the one making the free choice had no alternative.
Young Spock! WHY do you NEED to be part of the herd
/ hive mind?
Also, WHY do you question? If not for the FACT that the current answers do not fit with YOUR observations?
I would hazard young Spock... that you have come to the conclusion that religion is not only man-made and detrimental to the progress of society (as a global whole) but is also filled with such childish fantasies that you yourself left behind along with your teddy, Santa and security blanket many ages ago (ok, then maybe a few years ago) And there fore an illogical position to maintain in the face of evidence to the contrary.
"The Universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest." G'Kar-B5