RE: The Problem of Imperfect Revelation: Your Thoughts?
September 29, 2013 at 7:11 am
(This post was last modified: September 29, 2013 at 8:22 am by bennyboy.)
Okay, so in a nutshell, you feel that there's only one past, and it's set in stone. Let's assume this is true, and there aren't goofy little quarky things happening (like QM particles getting sent slightly into the past) which throw this fairly apparent truth into doubt. Fair enough. Now, let's look at the practical application of your idea: understanding something in the present, or predicting the future. If your viewpoint has any more merit than the concept of free will, then show how it applies to real-life situations.
In the case of free will, I have plenty of applications: I can sit in the candy store, hummm and hawww for a while, and decide which candy bar I want. Your philosophical assertion that I was foreordained by a determinist process to choose the Mars Bar, rather than the peanut butter cups, really doesn't add anything useful: only AFTER I've made my choice can you smugly announce "You had to make that choice, because your thinking is a purely deterministic process."
Yes, some things function so coursely that they can be predicted. For example, bouncing billiard balls on a well-crafted table. Fine. So predict what major my 9 year-old daughter will choose when (if?) she goes to university. I'll grant you the Godly power to know the exact state of every QM particle on Earth. You still won't be able to do it.
You say that, in looking back, determinism is obvious. But that is rarely useful-- only in a court of law, or in seeing if Johnson really scored a touchdown, does it matter. The reality is that looking forward, we have to account for the very many branches of possibility of which we are aware. And we have a word for navigating those many diverging paths throught the fog of war, often making decisions on a whim "just because"-- free will. Yes, you are free to confidently assert, "Yes, yes, we don't know some things, but we COULD with enough computing power." But THAT is as baseless an assertion as the idea of "could have done elsewise."
In the case of free will, I have plenty of applications: I can sit in the candy store, hummm and hawww for a while, and decide which candy bar I want. Your philosophical assertion that I was foreordained by a determinist process to choose the Mars Bar, rather than the peanut butter cups, really doesn't add anything useful: only AFTER I've made my choice can you smugly announce "You had to make that choice, because your thinking is a purely deterministic process."
Yes, some things function so coursely that they can be predicted. For example, bouncing billiard balls on a well-crafted table. Fine. So predict what major my 9 year-old daughter will choose when (if?) she goes to university. I'll grant you the Godly power to know the exact state of every QM particle on Earth. You still won't be able to do it.
You say that, in looking back, determinism is obvious. But that is rarely useful-- only in a court of law, or in seeing if Johnson really scored a touchdown, does it matter. The reality is that looking forward, we have to account for the very many branches of possibility of which we are aware. And we have a word for navigating those many diverging paths throught the fog of war, often making decisions on a whim "just because"-- free will. Yes, you are free to confidently assert, "Yes, yes, we don't know some things, but we COULD with enough computing power." But THAT is as baseless an assertion as the idea of "could have done elsewise."
