Oh no not another free will thread.

[Catholic_Lady]

What choice?  Can you choose b if a is an inevitably certainty? Is this a free choice? In what sense?

The only way it can be an inevitable certainty is if the one with the knowledge someone directly influences the flow of events. It's not difficult to understand.

It isn't, but this is Khem we are talking about. I would just ignore it. Even if he understands exactly what you mean, he will continue to act obtuse on purpose.

[Silver]

---

I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing it.  

Perhaps I have a blind spot in this particular instance regarding this discussion. Perhaps you're the one who can't see my perspective.

Either way, I respect your willingness to stick to your own as I am sticking to mine.

It's not really an issue of sticking to either of our anythings. It's not our contradictory bullshit and superstition, lol. Neither of us thinks that this god exists, neither of us thinks that the universe works that way, at least in this respect.  You conceptualize future knowledge as a could be.  I also think that accurately describes much or all of future knowledge in any common sense.  

That's not the type of future knowledge being invoked, however.  Will-be.

I'm asking you what choice you have if you -will- choose a.  Suspend our common skepticism that this is how the world works - it doesn't have to be how the world works to be logical or make sense.  It only needs to follow from it's propositions.  What freedom is there in that choice..there's certainly no freedom to choose b.

Yes, I understand the suspension. I'm doing it now. I am a writer; I'm allowing myself to perceive your perspective in regard to an Omni-being "knowing" that I will choose A over B. Even from this perspective, I don't see a lack of free will. Knowing simply isn't lack of free will. I honestly have explained as best I can.

[The Grand Nudger]

Can you choose b..in what sense is the choice free?

[GrandizerII]

That may be true, but you can't deny the conclusion to prove the argument false, you have to deal with the argument. Also, I believe God innovates in real time,  future doesn't exist, he is not bound by time, but neither is time something that exists from beginning to end with him, the present exists, the past once existed, and the future is going to come about and is not determined.

I see it as God being able to see past present and future simultaneously and all at once, because He is outside of time. While we can only see the present because we are bound by time. Think of it as God having the ability to see a cube at an angle, seeing 3 faces of it at a glance (3 squares, if you will.) Let's say we are on one of those squares. All we can see is the square we are currently on. The "present" square.

Anyway, God being able to see things this way doesn't take away the fact that we choose our own actions. It isn't a time travel situation where God goes into the future, sees what we do, comes back to the present, and now we cant do anything differently anymore because God already saw what He saw and so it's sealed that way forever. That's not really how I imagine it works.

Again, doesn't matter if God can see all events at once. Libertarian free will (in the nonrandom sense, which btw is another logical problem for the theists) and temporally omniscient God cannot logically coexist. It's either one or the other. In this sense, MK is spot on, and it's the typical theist that is getting this all wrong.

[Silver]

Can you choose b..in what sense is the choice free?

I have the initial choice between A or B, correct?
So someone knows that I will choose A over B.
That does not negate the fact I had the choice between the two.
All it means is that someone saw what I would choose.
My will was in no way impeded.

[The Grand Nudger]

Can you choose b..in what sense is the choice free?

I have the initial choice between A or B, correct?

I'm at the point where I'm actually asking you whether or not you do....so...?

So someone knows that I will choose A over B.
That does not negate the fact I had the choice between the two.

They know you cant choose b..and will choose a.  That's some choice, between a and a...and a....and a.....and a....and.......a.

All it means is that someone saw what I would choose.
My will was in no way impeded.

I don't think that your will was impeded, or that you didn't make a choice.  I'm asking what was free about either? Could you have chosen or willed b?

[Silver]

What they know has no direct influence over my decision making, however. That's the fact you cannot seem to grasp. Yes, they know what I will choose. I still have a choice, however. All they see is me making the choice between the two. They did not in any way influence my choice, they did not in any way affect my free will. How hard is that to grasp?

[The Grand Nudger]

What they know has no direct influence over my decision making, however.  That's the fact you cannot seem to grasp.  Yes, they know what I will choose.  I still have a choice, however.  All they see is me making the choice between the two.  They did not in any way influence my choice, they did not in any way affect my free will.  How hard is that to grasp?

There doesn't need to be any direct influence over your decision making.  If a person knows you will choose a...can you choose b? Is that a freedom you have, in this choice between a and b?

[Silver]

There doesn't need to be any direct influence over your decision making.  If a person knows you will choose a...can you choose b?

Another thing you cannot seem to understand.

My inability to choose B in no way means my free will was impeded. You certainly seem to think so rather unreasonably, however.

[The Grand Nudger]

Your ability to choose b was impeded...so...what was your free will doing, in this situation, in which you will choose a and can't choose b?