About
Community
Bad Ideas
Drugs
Ego
Erotica
Fringe
Society
Technology
register | bbs | search | rss | faq | about
meet up | add to del.icio.us | digg it
Go Back   Community > Society > My God Can Beat the Shit Out of Your God
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

My God Can Beat the Shit Out of Your God For discussing any and all religious viewpoints. Intolerance will not be tolerated. Keeping your sense of humor is required. Posting messages about theological paradoxes is encouraged.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Add Twisted_Ferret to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-15, 23:38
Twisted_Ferret Twisted_Ferret is offline
Regular
 
Mars
Default

I was thinking on your omniscience-and-free-will argument when something occurred to me. If you are saying that if someone knows for certain that event A will happen then nothing other than A can happen, then aren't you also saying that if an event (or A) happens no other event was ever possible? You've previously told me you believe in free will, so this seems to be a problem. I don't doubt that I am merely confused on some point, but clarification would be appreciated.



Edit: Fixed an error. ("You am".... heh heh. Oops.)

[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 03-15-2006).]
  #2   Add Rust to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-15, 23:52
Rust Rust is online now
Regular
 
Send a message via MSN to Rust
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

I was thinking on your omniscience-and-free-will argument when something occurred to me. If you am saying that if someone knows for certain that event A will happen then nothing other than A can happen, then aren't you also saying that if an event (or A) happens no other event was ever possible? You've previously told me you believe in free will, so this seems to be a problem. I don't doubt that I am merely confused on some point, but clarification would be appreciated.
Are you asking that if an event happens ('A') and nobody knew it was going to happen, does that mean that only 'A' was possible? Then no. Other things were possible, or at the very least we assume that other things are possible.

If I throw a quarter and it lands on 'heads' does that mean that 'tails' wasn't a possibility? No, or at least that's not how humanity has decided on the issue.

When we say something is possible we mean something that could in fact happen; something that does not have an obstruction that prevents it from happening. If there is no known obstruction (e.g. natural laws, someone knowing what is going to happen, etc.) to something else happening (let's say 'B') then the reasonable conclusion is that it ('B') was possible as well.

  #3   Add Twisted_Ferret to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-16, 19:06
Twisted_Ferret Twisted_Ferret is offline
Regular
 
Mars
Default

Would the existance of time travel also invalidate free will? You could watch something happen, know the result, and then go back to before. You'd know what had happened, therefore no other result could come about... right?
  #4   Add Rust to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-16, 20:45
Rust Rust is online now
Regular
 
Send a message via MSN to Rust
Default

Nobody can answer that in reality, because nobody knows how backwards time travel works (we don't even know if it's possible). If you go back in time, do you go to another alternate universe with different possibilities? Can you or can't you affect history? Nobody knows.

If it is possible, and if you cannot change history at all but know exactly what will happen, then yes, we can say that there would be no free will.
  #5   Add Twisted_Ferret to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-16, 22:17
Twisted_Ferret Twisted_Ferret is offline
Regular
 
Mars
Default

It's all clearer now. Thanks.
  #6   Add Rust to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-16, 22:23
Rust Rust is online now
Regular
 
Send a message via MSN to Rust
Default

Anytime.
  #7   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-16, 23:54
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

I didn't know we were allowed to dedicate threads to people...particularly with their name in the subject line.

Threads have been closed because they were in my name...

*confused*
  #8   Add Atomical to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 01:47
Atomical Atomical is offline
Regular
 
Ottawa IL America
Default

It wasn't dedicated to Rust. It was dedicated to finding the answer to the question and Rust happens to be accurate 'round these parts.
  #9   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 05:54
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

His name is in the subject line, and the question was directed at him.

This thread is for Rust, and is therefore dedicated to him.

*pats Atomical on the head*
  #10   Add LostCause to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 09:10
LostCause LostCause is offline
Regular
 
Behind the boat house
Default

Digital Savior is right. If I let everyone post personal threads to each other I'd end up running an e-mail service.

Sorry, I've got to close it. Fortunately, it wasn't a very original thread anyways.

Cheers,

Lost
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

 
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
 

totse.com certificate signatures
 
 
About | Community | Bad Ideas | Drugs | Ego | Erotica | Fringe | Society | Technology
Hot Topics