RE: Free will Argument against Divine Providence
July 27, 2013 at 2:08 am
(This post was last modified: July 27, 2013 at 2:10 am by Michael Schubert.)
(July 20, 2013 at 6:23 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote: P1) Humans have free will to choose otherwise than they did (libertarian).
P2) God's providence over history is such that he orders things overall to accomplish his divine plan.
P3) If [P2] is true, then God's 'orderings' of history will by necessity transgress on an agent's ability to have done otherwise ([P1]) in at least some capacity.
P4) In the worldview of Abrahamic monotheists, [P2] is true.
C) Therefore, in the worldview of an Abrahamic monotheist there can be no certainty regarding the libertarian concept of free will's truth at any given point.
Hm, I'm not really sure about this argument. And I don't tend to try to use omniscience to rule out "free will" either.
I'm not sure if I'm progressing through the argument very well. Where does the argument go wrong and can it be fixed?
Well, as Chomsky understood, behavior can only be determined within a set of rules. That is, free will is not really free. You can really only act in accordance with your external environment. So, going by these premises, the Abrahamic Monotheist's worldview seems to be correct.
I don't believe in God, of course. So I don't agree with the premises. But confining myself to this particular argument, the logic is consistent.
(July 27, 2013 at 2:05 am)cato123 Wrote:(July 20, 2013 at 6:23 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote: Where does the argument go wrong and can it be fixed?
P2 is where the argument derails. In P2 you assert that God exists and has certain attributes. This is unsubstantiated. What follows is then nonsense.
Yes, I agree that God does not exist. But I think you're supposed to put your disbelief aside and only judge the logic within the strictures of the argument.
