Theists: How can predetermined fate and free will coexist?

[Alex K]

I don't think free will in the way you would like to have it can exist at all, to me, it doesn't really figure into the equation whether the universe is deterministic or not.

[Alex K]

iow, I propose that all logically consistent and well defined notions of free will are compatible with determinism.

[RozKek]

I definitely wouldn't call it "predetermined fate." We believe God exists in a dimension outside of time and so he already knows all the choices we will make with our free will. But yeah, him knowing what choices we will make before we make them, doesn't make them any less our own choices.

---

Anyway, hopefully someone else will come in here and also answer in their own words. I hate it when I'm the only one who answers lol.

Even this isn't coherent, it's the exact same situation except that god is assumed to be in another dimension which in no way adds value to the argument. I will simplify this.

Please do not go off track with your answer:
God is all powerful, he can see the future. He sees that you're going to go to hell. Can you go to heaven?

[AceBoogie]

I don't think free will in the way you would like to have it can exist at all, to me, it doesn't really figure into the equation whether the universe is deterministic or not.

It has nothing to do with how I would like to have it, and we can leave a debate about free will for the philosophy section of the forum.

Here I'm specifically interested with how theists, and more specifically Christians (though theists of other faiths are welcome to comment here too) reconcile the contradiction between the idea of god giving us free will, yet at the same time being an omniscient, omnipotent being who has already predetermined everything that will ever happen.

Also, yes, I understand that our choices are quite limited, if you really delve into it. We are human beings; that right there limits us to very few choices if you want to get technical. That doesn't mean we don't have free will to make certain choices and quite honestly the determinstic view of reality can be a bit silly to me at times. Yes, cause and effect rules the universe and I don't think anyone denies that. But like I said I think we should leave that for the philosophy section as I want to specifically focus on how theists reconcile this very obvious contradiction.

edit: Also I'm not concerned with that, I'm concerned with how an intelligent being that created everything (including the future) can also give us free will to choose to do anything. This has little to do with determinism because god is, supposedly, an intelligent force that has created things the way they are. He knows if you're going to pick your nose at 5:06 P.M. on the 25th of December 2016 because he created you to do that. Is free will compatible with that? If so, please explain.

[Pat Mustard]

The only way that free will could exist in the christian sense were if their god wasn't all powerful. So christians can either have their god or they can have their free will. Losing either one though repudiates their religion, so sucks to be them.

[robvalue]

Agreed, rob. Awesome vid btw!

I don't get how this "outside of time" idea is supposed to somehow reconcile this contradiction we have here.

It doesn't, at all. It's just obfuscation.

And thanks very much! I got plenty more where that came from

iow, I propose that all logically consistent and well defined notions of free will are compatible with determinism.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. If we're discussing hard determinism, as in everything could be predicted from the word go, then I don't see any kind of "free will" being possible, that means anything.

By "free will", I would mean that intelligent agents have a genuine choice of multiple actions, and they could actually choose any of them. If it can be predicted what the agent will do with complete accuracy, then I no longer see it as any kind of choice. It's just a sequence of causes and effects. All we have is the illusion of choice.

If you define "choice"/"free will" so that it covers no real choice at all, then it's compatible, but meaningless IMO.

[purplepurpose]

Catholics, Orthodox Russian church and others Christians who believe in eternal hell are very courageous. To have this kind of mental pressure embraced voluntarily, that's badass.

[robvalue]

I don't think it's voluntarily. It's indoctrinated into them, on the whole. They can't simply discard it. It takes a huge feat of bravery to challenge the beliefs, and eventually work through them to the point where they can be discounted.

[purplepurpose]

I don't think it's voluntarily. It's indoctrinated into them, on the whole. They can't simply discard it. It takes a huge feat of bravery to challenge the beliefs, and eventually work through them to the point where they can be discounted.

If your talking about belief, where your ordered to kill people in the Gods name, that's fairly easy, especially if your promised heaven if you die. You take a part in a successful conquest - you will be rewarded. You die- rewarded. That's easy to believe in.

But, if we are talking about belief, where you must strive to be more selfless, even if your fed an idea of hell for refusing it, it sounds f hard, because its valuable, even if indoctrination is in the mix.

Atheism is "soft" compared to the idea of "selfless or burn".

[RozKek]

Agreed, rob. Awesome vid btw!

I don't get how this "outside of time" idea is supposed to somehow reconcile this contradiction we have here.

It doesn't, at all. It's just obfuscation.

And thanks very much! I got plenty more where that came from

iow, I propose that all logically consistent and well defined notions of free will are compatible with determinism.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. If we're discussing hard determinism, as in everything could be predicted from the word go, then I don't see any kind of "free will" being possible, that means anything.

By "free will", I would mean that intelligent agents have a genuine choice of multiple actions, and they could actually choose any of them. If it can be predicted what the agent will do with complete accuracy, then I no longer see it as any kind of choice. It's just a sequence of causes and effects. All we have is the illusion of choice.

If you define "choice"/"free will" so that it covers no real choice at all, then it's compatible, but meaningless IMO.

I agree completely with this, and I just want to add, even if the universe isn't superdeterministic and there is true randomness, I don't think free will exists in that case either. You have no control over true randomness the same way one has no control over something already determined. But it isn't 'either you're determined or driven by randomness' because the brain isn't quantum and follows cause and effect. Iow the brain is deterministic.

I've met definitions of free will where they've restricted free will to merely acting according to ones intentions with no restrictions from an outside force, in this case outside force being an agent; agent being another person. I don't agree with that definition because our will is clearly affected and determined by literally everything else, not just agents but by how the universe behaves and what we are. Why exclude that fact? Another thing is regarding acting out of your intention with no agent holding a gun to your head, what your intention is isn't your choice nor is they way you decide to approach your intention your choice, it's all determined and that renders that definition of free will pretty much useless. Our will is free when our intention and the way we act according to our intention isn't random nor determined an I don't see that being the case. Right now the only free wills we have are definitions of it that don't take into account things that play a quite big role. Just thought I'd bring this up, since I've seen it discussed.