Double trouble!

[CandideWest]

Now, if you take it strict logically the situation is like this:
If ** I play ** the game with Tyrion: I have to predict what Tyrion will choose, Head or Tails, tell it to Tyrion, then Tyrion make his choice the other way I’v said, and I am proven wrong 100%
This is true if me or you or any human person plays this game with Tyrion

Now you place God in the same position as I played; if ** God wants to play like a human** in the game, he will do the same as I did, and the predictions will be false 100%

Now, God wants to play like God in the game.

And there is still no correct answer available to him. So he correctly identifies that he cannot correctly predict the outcome of the throw while still respecting my free will to choose the opposite of whatever he predicts.

Just because Tyrion can’t imagine anything different, doesn’t mean it is like that, and this is the abuse of logic made by Tyrion. He supposed that God is limited (like a human) and concludes that God can’t prove his omnipotence.

No, it’s because he’s created a set of conditions which specifically exclude the possibility of God making a correct prediction (assuming Tyrion retains his free will).

 

[CandideWest]

I agree, Candide. God Can’t accurately predict the results of the throw-- at least not under certain conditions.

Paddy, whether or not Tyrion perfectly stipulated those conditions or not, I think the broader point here is that those conditions do exist.

Exactly.

However, I don’t see why so many posters seem to think that this would be a problem if god couldn’t do this. I strongly disagree with Tyrion that this poses a major problem for a general tri-omni theory of God. Most God theories already hold that God is not able to do that which is logically impossible, and accurately predicting the results of this test under certain conditions is logically impossible.

Tyrion, it doesn’t make any sense to state that the situation is logically possible because it is logically possible under other conditions, like if the experimenter was willing to do whatever God predicts to them. The point is that under the conditions you gave, it is logically impossible. Saying otherwise is like saying that since it is possible to make a circle, and it is possible to make a shape with corners, it is also logically possible to make a circle with corners.

Yup, that’s what I was getting at in my previous post. Tyrions logic is correct in showing that it is impossible for God to demonstrate his omniscience but since by it is impossible Gods omniscience doesn’t entail the ability to do it.

Thus no wider problems.

As identified earlier in this thread I suspect that the reason some people are getting so concerned about this is the same reason people once got so excited about God not being able to create a rock so heavy he can’t lift it - they thought it demonstrated one of Gods omnimax characteristics as false.

But they need not worry.

 

[CandideWest]

Well, to get Tyrion out of a falacy, all you have to do is to describe ALL the possibilities from which an omnipotent person can choose. Omnipotent means beyond your imagination, so for you it is impossible to do so. Thus Tyrion is stuck in a falacy.

No, there’s no fallacy to get Tyrion out of here. You just need to understand how contingent behaviour works. Looks at the coin flipping game for simplicity. There are only two possible outcomes, whichever outcome is picked by the player (whoever that player is) the correct answer is subsequently selected as the opposite.

The game is set up to be impossible to win. Thus even an omniscient being cannot win. Because that would be LOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

 

[CandideWest]

I find that omniscience - the ability to know anything and or everything anytime, is a sub-set of omnipotence.

Omnipotence is the ability to do anything God wishes without any compulsion to act.

Thus, the ability to know (verb) is just another one of the verbs God is ABLE to do.

The supposed paradox of omniscience VERSUS omniscience rests on a false insistence that God is somehow compelled to know everything at all times even if He didnt want to.

My favorite movie meme dealing with this counter-apologetic from the film Bruce Almighty…

Human - Guess how many fingers I’m holding up God?
God - Seven
Human - Ha! Gotcha. See. five fingers.

That would be removing Tyrions free will, so no matter how hard he tries to sit on his hands and not touch the dice he will be forced to reach out and throw them to meet Gods prediction.

That is the other possible way out of Tyrions thought experiment but one which is not acceptable to most Christians (they believe God respects human free will).

 

[Tyrion]

Oh, hi, Serious! Guess you didn’t like being banned, so you started a new login?

As you might now realize, I was that ‘idiot’. And now you’re back, a year later, without any additional insight into what free will is. As we discussed last year, your definition of ‘free will’ isn’t the only possible definition. In this post, I showed you that the very reference you gave us to support your definition of ‘free will’ included this statement: In other words, you can keep coming back and attempting to assert that your definition of ‘free will’ is the only game in town, or you can do some research and recognize that the definition of ‘idiot’ isn’t “a person who disagrees with me.”

Oh, and by the way: “there was no answer” is a lie. We kept arguing that point for another few days.

Sorry, my friend, you are mistaken. The conversation I was referring to, happened about 7 years ago… but it sure looks like that there is nothing new under the Sun.

By the way, I went and checked out some of the posts of Serious, and it is quite a compliment to be confused with him. Thanks

 

[CandideWest]

Like I said, it relies on Tyrion contradicting his own will. Let’s imagine Tyrion wants A.

No, because that would be incorrect, Tyrions will in this case is that he will choose the opposite of whatever God predicts. So if God predicts A Tyrion will choose B, if God predicts B Tyrion will choose A.

So the argument relies only on Tyrion being able to retain his free will.

I recognize that neither you nor he grasps the coherency of God, but your failure to grasp it does not actually make God incoherent.

There is nothing in his argument which challenges the coherency of God (he tried to but that part of the argument fails) his argument does show that it is impossible for God to demonstrate his omniscience. That is all.

It will not be possible for Tyrion to do what you say he can do above.

You wrote,
"
if God predicts that he will choose “A” then Tyrion chooses “B”.
If God predicts that he will choose “B” then Tyrion chooses “A”.
"

That is incoherent. First of all, God does not “predict.” God knows. So that is the first point showing the incoherency of your statements above. We are temporal beings, and we watch time unfold, and the future is hidden from our view. But the future is what it is, just as the past is what it is and the present is what it is. Everything that is, is what it is. That is the Law of Identity. So: suppose that, in the future, Tyrion chooses A. Then, that is how it is. That is reality. In such a scenario, BOTH your statements above are incoherent. Tyrion CANNOT choose B, because Tyrion DOES choose A.

In that case you are arguing that God in making his prediction will remove Tyrions free will. In other words, Tyrion’s will is that once God has made his prediction Tyrion will select the opposite. but once God has made his prediction Tyrion LOSES HIS FREE WILL to choose the opposite.

As i stated in my original post breaking down the logic for you. This is an alternative route through the problem, but you encounter the problem that “This is contrary to one of the stated attributes of God - that he does not interfere with individual free will.”

To choose B contradicts his choosing A, and there are no contradictions in reality. The Law of Identity states that Tyrion chooses what Tyrion chooses, and if it is the case that Tyrion chooses A, then Tyrion chooses A. And neither of your statements above accounts for this reality. To say, “if God predicts that he will choose A, then Tyrion chooses B,” is inconsistent with the reality that he chooses A. And to say, “if God predicts that he will choose B, then Tyrion chooses A,” is inconsistent with God’s omniscience.

Exactly, that is why God would correctly identify that he cannot provide a correct prediction which is contingent and inverse to his prediction

The reality is, God predicts Tyrion chooses A, and Tyrion chooses A.

But that is counter to Tyrions free will. As I stated for you in my logical breakdown…

“The only alternative is if point 3 is not possible – so if following Gods prediction there is NO CHOICE in the outcome of the decision. However this would mean that the individual “choosing” at the decision point has no free will in this decision. This is contrary to one of the stated attributes of God that he does not interfere with individual free will.”

Consider Saint Peter…

The rest of your post is off topic comments about how God can make accurate predictions in situations which are outside of Tyrions thought experiment and therefore irrelevant to us here.

 

[Ion]

That would be removing Tyrions free will, so no matter how hard he tries to sit on his hands and not touch the dice he will be forced to reach out and throw them to meet Gods prediction.

That is the other possible way out of Tyrions thought experiment but one which is not acceptable to most Christians (they believe God respects human free will).

Tyrion free will is anyway not free to choose, since he will choose depending on God choice.
Then where it is said that what Tyrion wills, have to happen? Why God’s will has to be weaker?

 

[Ion]

By the way, talking about circles with corners; they are possible; kind of this is the “spherical geometry” Just take a look and see some weird things there.

 

[zro_x]

By the way, talking about circles with corners; they are possible; kind of this is the “spherical geometry” Just take a look and see some weird things there.

Those aren’t really circles in the sense that I mean “circle”

 

[Ion]

The whole “paradox” it’s a swaitzer.
Tyrion disregards his own will, then pretends that god acts in a limited manner, with a will weaker than Tyrion’s, in Tyrion’s time, supposing to act non-omnipotent then concluding he’s not omnipotent; This is a falacy.

 

[CandideWest]

Tyrion free will is anyway not free to choose, since he will choose depending on God choice.
Then where it is said that what Tyrion wills, have to happen? Why God’s will has to be weaker?

It isn’t a question of Gods will being weaker.

Imagine you are playing my coin flipping game - I SELECT the outcome of each flip. You call the result - heads or tails and whichever you choose, I SELECT the opposite result. You cannot win, not due to any weakness of your will, but because the game is rigged to make it so that you cannot win.

 

[Ion]

Sorry, my friend, you are mistaken. The conversation I was referring to, happened about 7 years ago… but it sure looks like that there is nothing new under the Sun.

By the way, I went and checked out some of the posts of Serious, and it is quite a compliment to be confused with him. Thanks

7 years ? Man, you really like the catholics and what they say to you…

 

[CandideWest]

The whole “paradox” it’s a swaitzer.
Tyrion disregards his own will, then pretends that god acts in a limited manner, with a will weaker than Tyrion’s, in Tyrion’s time, supposing to act non-omnipotent then concluding he’s not omnipotent; This is a falacy.

No, you have misunderstood Tyrions argument. He isn’t disregarding his own will, he has created a question which is impossible for God to correctly answer. Showing that God cannot demonstrate his omniscience.

So far so good.

He then attempts to take that a step further to show that this inability is contrary to Gods omnipotence and the argument falls down because omnipotence does not require that God can perform logical impossibilities.

That is the flaw in Tyrions argument. It amazes me that most people on this thread are studiously ignoring a real gap in Tyrions logic in order to attack things he didn’t argue. Why not just deal with the argument as stated?

 

[Ion]

It isn’t a question of Gods will being weaker.

Imagine you are playing my coin flipping game - I SELECT the outcome of each flip. You call the result - heads or tails and whichever you choose, I SELECT the opposite result. You cannot win, not due to any weakness of your will, but because the game is rigged to make it so that you cannot win.

Only the fact that Tyrion only pretends he will exercise his free will to choose, heads or tails, when in fact he will chose depending on God’s choice is sufficient to demote the whole thing; thats because God is supposed to answer what the Tyrion’s free will is going to say, and not the “against god” will which in fact takes place.

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Again, no.

have you actually read the original post on this thread? do you understand that Tyrion can make a decision contingent on the prediction he is offered?

imagine we’re playing heads or tails. you have to call the result but i get to choose the result of the coin flip (after you have made your selection), and I will ALWAYS choose to make your call wrong. if you choose heads, the result is tails. if you choose tails the result is heads. you will lose EVERY TIME.

This is the position that God is placed in in the thought experiment Tyrion has created.

does that make it easier to understand?

i know tyrion will continuously change his mind. but tyrion then asks God to predict the numbers when the dice are thrown at a definite point in time. God predicts the numbers correctly as asked but tyrion has already changed his mind again before the dice come to rest.

 

[CandideWest]

Only the fact that Tyrion only pretends he will exercise his free will to choose, heads or tails, when in fact he will chose depending on God’s choice is sufficient to demote the whole thing; thats because God is supposed to answer what the Tyrion’s free will is going to say, and not the “against god” will which in fact takes place.

No, he isn’t pretending to exercise his free will in choosing heads or tails. He is only exercising his free will by making the choice contingent on the prediction.

God is being asked to correctly answer a question where the correct answer is defined as being the opposite of whatever answer God provides.

It is LOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

 

[CandideWest]

i know tyrion will continuously change his mind. but tyrion then asks God to predict the numbers when the dice are thrown at a definite point in time. God predicts the numbers correctly as asked but tyrion has already changed his mind again before the dice come to rest.

Are you actually reading the posts you are replying to? There is nothing in there about Tyrion changing his mind so your reply is a non-sequitur.

Once again, no Tyrion us not “continuously changing his mind” he waits until God makes his prediction. Tyrion THEN decides to act contrary to that prediction.

How about we actually play the coin flipping game so you can try it for yourself? Heads or tails?

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Are you actually reading the posts you are replying to? There is nothing in there about Tyrion changing his mind so your reply is a non-sequitur.

Once again, no Tyrion us not “continuously changing his mind” he waits until God makes his prediction. Tyrion THEN decides to act contrary to that prediction.

How about we actually play the coin flipping game so you can try it for yourself? Heads or tails?

heads.

 

[CandideWest]

heads.

Incorrect. The answer is tails.

Candide West 1 - 0 Paddy walker.

Round 2

Heads or tails?

 

[Gorgias]

Sorry, my friend, you are mistaken. The conversation I was referring to, happened about 7 years ago… but it sure looks like that there is nothing new under the Sun.

LOL…! OK, whatever you say! :nope: How odd, though, that you pegged – verbatim! – the conversation you and I had last year … down to the very insults you hurled at me, at that time!

By the way, I went and checked out some of the posts of Serious, and it is quite a compliment to be confused with him. Thanks

Yes… I suppose it’s always nice to be remembered, a year later!