47615 - omniscience vs agency

Nanti-SARRMM · Post by **Nanti-SARRMM** » Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:48 pm

Katya wrote:If there isn't more than one possible outcome in a situation, there isn't really a choice. Do you agree with me so far?

If there is only one possible outcome, is it because God can see what we will choose to arrive at that outcome, or is it because everything we do has already been set in stone and we're following the dictates of destiny? And, to us, is there a difference?

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Sun Oct 26, 2008 5:24 pm

Nanti-SARRMM wrote:
Katya wrote:If there isn't more than one possible outcome in a situation, there isn't really a choice. Do you agree with me so far?
If there is only one possible outcome, is it because God can see what we will choose to arrive at that outcome, or is it because everything we do has already been set in stone and we're following the dictates of destiny? And, to us, is there a difference?

Well, I'm not even talking about God yet. I'm just saying that one outcome is not a choice. Do you agree with that?

Nanti-SARRMM · Post by **Nanti-SARRMM** » Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:39 pm

Katya wrote: Well, I'm not even talking about God yet. I'm just saying that one outcome is not a choice. Do you agree with that?

If there is no possible outcome but one, then yes I agree.

Fredjikrang · Post by **Fredjikrang** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 8:47 am

I'm not sure that I do.

Nanti-SARRMM · Post by **Nanti-SARRMM** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 8:59 am

What I mean is if we are forced to that one possible outcome, if we cannot change anything, like a mouse in a maze looking for cheese, then that is no choice.

However, if we merely take a look a look at the end result, the final outcome, we miss all the choices taken to get there.

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:05 am

Nanti-SARRMM wrote:However, if we merely take a look a look at the end result, the final outcome, we miss all the choices taken to get there.

Sure. There's always one outcome for all events, and that doesn't mean there was only one choice. I'm just saying, if there's only one outcome possible, there's not really a choice. (Like a multiple-choice test with only one answer per question.)

What are your objections, Fred?

Fredjikrang · Post by **Fredjikrang** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:25 am

I'm not sure that there only being one result means that there is no ability to choose. Seems to me that free will exists even in situations where there is only one choice, or only one result.

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:22 am

Fredjikrang wrote:I'm not sure that there only being one result means that there is no ability to choose. Seems to me that free will exists even in situations where there is only one choice, or only one result.

So you think that bowling balls, dropped from a second storey window, choose to crash to the ground?

vorpal blade · Post by **vorpal blade** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:52 am

Katya wrote:
Nanti-SARRMM wrote:However, if we merely take a look a look at the end result, the final outcome, we miss all the choices taken to get there.
Sure. There's always one outcome for all events, and that doesn't mean there was only one choice. I'm just saying, if there's only one outcome possible, there's not really a choice. (Like a multiple-choice test with only one answer per question.)

What are your objections, Fred?

I'd like to add a little to what I believe is Nanti-SARRMM's thought. The idea that there is only one, or more than one outcome possible depends on where you are in time.

I'm thinking of a little trick used by some teachers of probability. I know you are good at probability, Katya, so you may have heard this one. A teacher puts 100 red marbles in a jar, 100 green marbles in the jar, and 100 blue marbles in the jar. He mixes the marbles in the jar so they are uniformly distributed. Then, without looking into the jar, he reaches in and pulls out a red marble, and shows it to the class. He then asks the class, "What are the odds that this is a red marble?"

Someone, a little too eager to answer, says, "One in three!"

The teacher smiles. "No, the chances are 100 percent that this is a red marble, because I've already pulled out the marble and seen that it is red. Before anyone looked at the end result we could say that the chances were one in three that the marble might be red, but once we know the result the chances are 100 percent that it is what it is. When you already know the outcome there is only one possible outcome, but before we knew the outcome there were three possible outcomes."

As a thought, if time is not measured to God, and He sees the end from the beginning, then God knows what marble will be taken out of the jar in the same way the teacher knew what marble he had already taken out of the jar by looking at it. The teacher was free to take out any one of three colors. God did not make him take out the red marble. God only knew in advance it would be red, because he had the advantage of having seen the future as though it were already the past and therefore unchangeable.

Reality is more complex, I know, but it is just a thought.

Fredjikrang · Post by **Fredjikrang** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:18 pm

Katya wrote: So you think that bowling balls, dropped from a second storey window, choose to crash to the ground?

Of course not, bowling balls don't have free will, period. Much like they can't see, or hear. It is simply not part of their makeup.

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:38 pm

Thanks vb, I see your point and I get that perception of reality fixes it (in a Schroedinger-ian way). But what if you only had one red marble and I told you to pick a marble. Would you say that you had a choice, in terms of which marble to pick?

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:40 pm

Fredjikrang wrote:
Katya wrote: So you think that bowling balls, dropped from a second storey window, choose to crash to the ground?
Of course not, bowling balls don't have free will, period. Much like they can't see, or hear. It is simply not part of their makeup.

How do you know a priori what has free will and what doesn't? (In my mind, it has to do with determinism.)

Fredjikrang · Post by **Fredjikrang** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:49 pm

And why should I have to know it a priori? That seems like an unreasonable demand considering that all that can really be known a priori are tautalogies.

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:19 pm

Well, it seemed like you'd already determined, ahead of time, that a bowling ball has no free will. So I'm wondering how you know that, if not through observation or trial and error. (Or, by extension, how would you determine if a newly encountered thing had free will?)

Fredjikrang · Post by **Fredjikrang** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:32 pm

Nope. I've determined that through personal and shared experience, and would suggest that is the only way to know.

Tao · Post by **Tao** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:38 pm

[quote=Katya]So you think that bowling balls, dropped from a second storey window, choose to crash to the ground?[/quote]

Oy vey; enter Skousen... that might be quite the tangential discussion in and of itself.

vorpal blade · Post by **vorpal blade** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:43 pm

Katya wrote:Thanks vb, I see your point and I get that perception of reality fixes it (in a Schroedinger-ian way). But what if you only had one red marble and I told you to pick a marble. Would you say that you had a choice, in terms of which marble to pick?

To play along with you, if the only marble to pick was red, and I picked a marble, it would be red. It would seem that I had no choice.

To give myself some logical wiggle room I could say that I also have the choice of not picking a marble at all. Or I could choose to go out and get other marbles, and give myself more choices. Or divine intervention could miraculously change the color of the marble at any time, thus negating any choice I made.

I can forsee many possible directions you could choose to take this discussion, which are available to you at this moment in time, but which will be lost when the outcome has been reached. Not knowing the future I'm eager to find out where you are going with it.

vorpal blade · Post by **vorpal blade** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:03 pm

Tao wrote:
Katya wrote:So you think that bowling balls, dropped from a second storey window, choose to crash to the ground?
Oy vey; enter Skousen... that might be quite the tangential discussion in and of itself.

Or, Orson Pratt.

361 · Post by **361** » Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:46 pm

Katya wrote:Thanks vb, I see your point and I get that perception of reality fixes it (in a Schroedinger-ian way). But what if you only had one red marble and I told you to pick a marble. Would you say that you had a choice, in terms of which marble to pick?

I would say that I would pick up the marble.

I would also say that no matter how many times you "rewind" and play that scene over again my decision would ALWAYS be to pick up the marble.

(provided you erase my memory of the previous marble picking up experience)

Like... The Monday October 27th 2008 6:41pm version of Orb360 (with experiences up to that point, but not past) would make the same decision concerning the marble no matter how many times you put that version of Orb360 in the same situation.

If I had to relive my life with the same experiences and with no memory of my past "life" I would make the same exact mistakes as I already have.

Do you get what I'm trying to say?

However... Previous events could affect future decisions. The fact that God knows what decision the "Monday October 27th 2008 6:41pm version of Orb360" would make means He ALSO knows who the "Monday October 27th 2008 6:42pm version of Orb360" would be and what decisions he would make... And so forth and so on as far out as he would like to look.

Think of it like Pi... No one knows what the next digit of Pi is... But we can find out if we apply the function that describes Pi... So if you know the function... You can know Pi as far out as you want to look.

Similarly... if you know the "Orb360 function" then you know how Orb360 would act in any given situation.

Now each function interacts with all the other functions in an infinitely complex pattern... Infinite complexity means it cannot be understood or predicted, unless you have an infinite mind.

Anyways... My 2 cents (or 5 bucks?)

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 6:47 am

Fredjikrang wrote:Nope. I've determined that through personal and shared experience, and would suggest that is the only way to know.

OK, so what are the clues that tell you that some things have free will and some don't? What is the evidence you look for, one way or the other. I'm arguing that a deterministic predictability of response is a good indicator that something doesn't have free will. Do you agree? Do you have another methodology?