Liberal Arts Major
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
This will be fun. >_>
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Elite
=+=
=/\= eX, Master of the C.L.I.T. since 1997 =/\=
Cross, if you don't surrender the ferret, I'll scrape out your innards and force-feed them to rabid Sephiroth fangirls. --Kenri
http://www.reactorsite.com/
***Member of the Libertarian Party since 2004***
Special
~~~
No, I don't own the Flux.
Liberal Arts Major
Let's ask a quesiton you seem to be avoiding: how are those decisions seen? Let's return to my metaphor - God looking through everybody's day planner. He didn't decide for you; you did, then he saw it. For things in the far future, the only way omniscience can survive is by constructing the future itself from the information and actions of the present/past. Ever read that book about the guy or demon or something who knew everything about the present and was thus able to predict the future?
The fact that he knows what you will do is enough, if it is known you will say yes, then you have no choice, you will say yes, because it was already seen.
He saw your choice. You will say yes because you intend to say yes. If somebody told you, "You will say yes," you are given the choice to say yes or not say yes. Otherwise, it's still your choice.
...I would answer to the rest, except I don't feel like being so redundant. One final attempt at illustration:
Choice A is pending in, say, five minutes. Person B sees Person A will make Choice A, because... He's special. Person B and Person A stand by one another, Person B snickering. Person A asks what's so funny. Person B says nothing. Person A makes Choice A.
The fact still stands: Person A made Choice A. The only way this choice would appear in the future to Person B was if Person A chose it. The illusion of free will is itself an illusion. Now, let's try this.
Choice A is pending in, say, five minutes. Person B sees Person A will make Choice A, because... He's special. Person B and Person A stand by one another, Person B snickering. Person A asks what's so funny. Person B says, "You will make Choice A." Person A still makes Choice A, just to spite him.
In this case, Choice A was still made, but Person A made it because he predicted that Person B wanted him to make Choice B. It was a completely free choice.
This is hard to put into words, but yours is a temporary lapse of logic exalting the choice above the individual and into the universal.
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Panthera tigris
AKA: Pablo, Tiger, The Tiger, Tiger of Tigerness,
TS Quint, Nameless, and finally, THE TIGER.
Liberal Arts Major
I use that metaphor because it's the closest to the real thing. It's impossible to know a choice will be made without knowing that said choice is actually... a choice.
If Person A is without a doubt going to make Choice A, then Choice A is the only possible result. Choice B can be for all purposes non-existent, because it will not be chosen.
Thanks. Now would you like to make a point that hinders my argument?
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
Wow, you lost me right there. Before I take the time to read the rest of that, would you like to tell me what choice is? A divine party favor, perhaps?
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
...And a choice is the option you picked. Through free will.
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Message last edited by Silvas on 12/31/2004 at 06:39:56 PM
Liberal Arts Major
Arguments must be carefully made. >_>
I'll back down, if only for the fact I can't come up with a way to form a better answer for you then my combined efforts on the YSB.
>_>
I vinnar?
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
And what's frustrating about my method?
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
One makes a choice, if you want to phrase it that way, but the choice is predetermined and for all purposes, a predetermined path. Advanced fate is you will.
The path can only lead up to the choice, but at that point free will takes over. Unless you can explain how the predetermined path is exerted upon the moment the choice is made.
Secondly, even if an omniscient being were to meddle and tell someone what they would do, he already saw his meddling, and knew what would happen because of it, so that he still knew what would happen, and consequently, knew what the person would do.
...True, you can loop around your theory that way. That's what I'm doing with mine. It doesn't get either of us anywhere, though. The choice is still the person's; he may rethink his choice as in my demonstration based upon the knowledge of the other person, but who cares?
If I am "fated" to take a certain "path", am I truly choosing it, even though I was without a doubt going to take that path, there was a 100% chance I would, a certainty. There is no alternative, I was always going to take such a path, Free Will would state that I could choose otherwise, but I couldn't.
Technically, you are not "fated" to take a certain "path" unless your argument is true. That's the entire opposite of what I was trying to explain. The path is only formed when the choices of everyone at a given moment are clumped together. It is possible to predict the choices that someone will make based upon their past choices, but there is no guarantee that they haven't changed their mind. And you were always going to take that path because... You were always going to take that path. You chose it, now you take it. I... Don't see any other way to say that.
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Liberal Arts Major
___
~ Silvas ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
New Moderator
So the omniscient person is the one who decided what choice you were going to make...?
But anyway, here's one last argument. What if we took the omniscience away? A scenario, if you will.
Person A makes Choice A. Person B knows nothing.
Person A makes Choice A. Person B knows Person A will make Choice A.
There's no difference. Choice A is still made, regardless. Applying your logic to the second case, Person A had no choice when he made Choice A. But because the situation is the same, we can apply that same logic to the first case - effectively depriving Person A of free will. Thus, there is no free will.
Now, what if Person A tries to avoid Person B by changing his mind?
Person A starts to make Choice A but stops and makes Choice B. Person B knows nothing.
Person A starts to make Choice A but stops and makes Choice B. Person B is omnicient, so he knew that Person A would ultimately make Choice B.
Applying your logic, this nullifies the change of mind entirely and produces the same effect for both.
In other words, whether somebody is omniscient or not, the choice will still be made as it stands. As you said in the evolution argument, I may apply that here - and in both cases the omniscient person is superfluous. Unless Person B forces Choice A, then Choice A is made of free will.
One may allude to war, for a more practical scenario. Let's say General A is about to plan an attack on General B, but General B knows nothing. The attack is carried out, General B gets screwed, and everyone is happy. But lets say that somehow - divine visitation? - General B "knows" those plans ahead of time. Unless he does something, General A still carries them out - a choice made by free will. The difference is that General B is prepared and can defend against the attack.
Any witty arguments against that?
___
~ Ogordemir ~
"Abrace obscuritas!"
Elite
=+=
=/\= eX, Master of the C.L.I.T. since 1997 =/\=
Cross, if you don't surrender the ferret, I'll scrape out your innards and force-feed them to rabid Sephiroth fangirls. --Kenri
http://www.reactorsite.com/
***Member of the Libertarian Party since 2004***
New Moderator
___
~ Ogordemir ~
"Abrace obscuritas!"
Elite
=+=
=/\= eX, Master of the C.L.I.T. since 1997 =/\=
Cross, if you don't surrender the ferret, I'll scrape out your innards and force-feed them to rabid Sephiroth fangirls. --Kenri
http://www.reactorsite.com/
***Member of the Libertarian Party since 2004***
Special
~~~
No, I don't own the Flux.
Elite
=+=
=/\= eX, Master of the C.L.I.T. since 1997 =/\=
Cross, if you don't surrender the ferret, I'll scrape out your innards and force-feed them to rabid Sephiroth fangirls. --Kenri
http://www.reactorsite.com/
***Member of the Libertarian Party since 2004***
Special
~~~
No, I don't own the Flux.
New Moderator
Choice A must be taken, because anything else results in an impossible contradiction. There is no true choice made, because there was no other choice.
The only way that could be true is if the omniscient being exerts a force upon the chooser. Abstractions are ALWAYS subordinate to the reality they are abstracted from; knowledge of the future is an abstraction of the present; omniscience is subordinate to reality. Only an imposition of will can change that.
___
~ Ogordemir ~
"Abrace obscuritas!"
Special
~~~
No, I don't own the Flux.
Special
Correct.
I'm siding with xp, btw.
~~~
No, I don't own the Flux.
New Moderator
If one knows the future with absolute certainty, there should be no need to force your will on another.
Yeah, true. But that begs the question: what is the future?
___
~ Ogordemir ~
"Abrace obscuritas!"
New Moderator
___
~ Ogordemir ~
"Abrace obscuritas!"
New Moderator
The present is right now. Hard to describe.
...Right. Let me rephrase that: what makes up the future?
___
~ Ogordemir ~
"Abrace obscuritas!"
New Moderator
...So the present is pointless?
___
~ Ogordemir ~
"Abrace obscuritas!"
Special
~~~
No, I don't own the Flux.