Double trouble!

[Gorgias]

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.

Well, not so much. That’s the point of the reference to “God Almighty”: Tyrion wants to choose Y when he hears God’s prediction of X, he intends to choose Y, and he sets in motion actions that he believes will end up causing Y to happen. But, as it turns out, X happens.

Now, you and he will make the argument that this curtails his free will. But, that would imply that God forces X to occur. However, there’s no evidence that this is the case: there’s just Tyrion’s serious intent to make it happen, and God’s assertion to the contrary. Any assertion that God forced Tyrion’s hand is unsubstantiated (although, since he hadn’t intended X, I’m sure Tyrion would sincerely believe that God stacked the deck. That’s irrelevant, though: this is a thought experiment about action, not belief.) In any case, God made a simple statement of fact, and Tyrion’s subsequent intent simply didn’t materialize. His free will wasn’t thwarted; instead, he simply didn’t follow through.

However, Tyrion has since made an interesting turn in his argument: he asserts that free will isn’t about choice, it’s about choice plus action. In other words, unless he does exactly what he says he wants to do, he’ll paint the picture that his free will has been violated. Convenient, that. However, his assertion that this is how free will operates, doesn’t automatically make it so. Those of us who draw a distinction between ‘free will’ and ‘action’ will shrug and point out that nothing kept him from willing anything.

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?

Maybe because we’re trying to deal with the weakness of his construction upstream from that point? I see what you’re saying, but I think that the argument falls apart before we get to the point of ‘logical impossibilities’. Your point is valid; but not necessary, I don’t think.

Two last thoughts: this whole construction depends on the notion of linear time. That is, it only works insomuch as God’s prediction occurs at time t, Tyrion’s choice at some time t+x, and the event at t+x+y. If God were constrained by time, there would be no question that Tyrion could trump God, presuming (of course) that Tyrion would not fail to do what he intends to do (I still think there’s an issue there). However, God isn’t constrained by time. Therefore, since God is outside of time, he can accurately make truth statements about anything inside of time (and from our perspective, he makes these statements at a particular time). That is, although it appears that God’s statement occurs at time t, that is not true. God is making that statement outside of time – and therefore, what he perceives as occurring at time t+x+y is necessarily true. It simply follows from the definition of God existing outside of time. It doesn’t simply fall apart because of a construction that necessarily requires God to act within time.

Second: the whole construction also depends on the notion of ‘proving’ omniscience. Tyrion seriously thinks that, unless God can ‘prove’ His omniscience to him, that there’s no such thing as omniscience. Really? Where does that follow from any reasonable definition of omniscience?

 

[CandideWest]

Well, not so much. That’s the point of the reference to “God Almighty”: Tyrion wants to choose Y when he hears God’s prediction of X, he intends to choose Y, and he sets in motion actions that he believes will end up causing Y to happen. But, as it turns out, X happens.

Now, you and he will make the argument that this curtails his free will. But, that would imply that God forces X to occur. However, there’s no evidence that this is the case: there’s just Tyrion’s serious intent to make it happen, and God’s assertion to the contrary. Any assertion that God forced Tyrion’s hand is unsubstantiated (although, since he hadn’t intended X, I’m sure Tyrion would sincerely believe that God stacked the deck. That’s irrelevant, though: this is a thought experiment about action, not belief.) In any case, God made a simple statement of fact, and Tyrion’s subsequent intent simply didn’t materialize. His free will wasn’t thwarted; instead, he simply didn’t follow through.

Sure, however that objection is easy enough to resolve by simply asking God to predict what Tyrion will choose to do, as opposed to what he will actually be able to actualise. That’s what I did in my breakdown of the argument in post 119.

However, Tyrion has since made an interesting turn in his argument: he asserts that free will isn’t about choice, it’s about choice plus action. In other words, unless he does exactly what he says he wants to do, he’ll paint the picture that his free will has been violated. Convenient, that. However, his assertion that this is how free will operates, doesn’t automatically make it so. Those of us who draw a distinction between ‘free will’ and ‘action’ will shrug and point out that nothing kept him from willing anything.

There’s an argument to be made either way there, but we can simply sidestep that issue as above.

Maybe because we’re trying to deal with the weakness of his construction upstream from that point? I see what you’re saying, but I think that the argument falls apart before we get to the point of ‘logical impossibilities’. Your point is valid; but not necessary, I don’t think.

I can’t see any gaps currently. The options seem to be

1. Tyrions argument showing that demonstrating omniscience is logically impossible, so God cannot do it and omnipotence doesn’t entail that he should be able to.
2. Tyrions argument fails to show that demonstrating omniscience is impossible, so God’s omnipotence entails he must be able to do it. And we lack an argument showing that he cannot.

As far as I can tell its a done deal.

Two last thoughts: this whole construction depends on the notion of linear time. That is, it only works insomuch as God’s prediction occurs at time t, Tyrion’s choice at some time t+x, and the event at t+x+y. If God were constrained by time, there would be no question that Tyrion could trump God, presuming (of course) that Tyrion would not fail to do what he intends to do (I still think there’s an issue there). However, God isn’t constrained by time. Therefore, since God is outside of time, he can accurately make truth statements about anything inside of time (and from our perspective, he makes these statements at a particular time). That is, although it appears that God’s statement occurs at time t, that is not true. God is making that statement outside of time – and therefore, what he perceives as occurring at time t+x+y is necessarily true. It simply follows from the definition of God existing outside of time. It doesn’t simply fall apart because of a construction that necessarily requires God to act within time.

The problem here is more one of contingent nature of the correct answer rather than time. Theoretically we could do the entire operation without employing a sequence although in practice we can’t.

The key is that Tyrion is asking God to correctly answer a question where the correct answer is defined and being different to whatever answer God provides.

It’s just a different form of asking God to make a four sided triangle or a married bachelor. He can’t do it, but that tells us nothing meaningful about omnipotence.

The only ground gained here is that Tyrion has shown that even God cannot demonstrate his own omniscience while respecting human free will.

Second: the whole construction also depends on the notion of ‘proving’ omniscience. Tyrion seriously thinks that, unless God can ‘prove’ His omniscience to him, that there’s no such thing as omniscience. Really? Where does that follow from any reasonable definition of omniscience?

I don’t believe he’s ever made that assertion. And I don’t think that was his intended line of argument.

I think his intent was to follow the line that Gods omnipotence implies he must be able to demonstrate his omniscience. But having shown that this is a logical impossibility this obviously fails.

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Incorrect. The answer is tails.

Candide West 1 - 0 Paddy walker.

Round 2

Heads or tails?

no Paddy is correct because Paddy is Omniscient and the answer to your question; heads or tails, is heads.

Paddy 1 - 0 Candide West

 

[CandideWest]

no Paddy is correct because Paddy is Omniscient and the answer to your question; heads or tails, is heads.

Paddy 1 - 0 Candide West

Nope, the answer was in my previous post, as I said in the rules, I get to select the correct answer (after you have made your prediction). I did and the answer was tails. You are playing MY game here, you need to comply with MY rules (otherwise you are off topic).

You predicted incorrectly (as you always will). Fancy playing again?

Heads or tails?

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Nope, the answer was in my previous post, as I said in the rules, I get to select the correct answer (after you have made your prediction). I did and the answer was tails. You are playing MY game here, you need to comply with MY rules (otherwise you are off topic).

You predicted incorrectly (as you always will). Fancy playing again?

Heads or tails?

no. I am right.

lets take a look at your rules;

Heads or tails?

so there are the rules in total. as an omniscient being i know already the answer is heads. and i am correct, the answer is heads.

you, on the other hand are incorrect. because you neglected to include in your rules the statement that you would be choosing the opposite of my prediction.
and as you say, look at your rules, if it is not in the rules i am to ignore it.
therefore i am correct and ‘heads’ is the correct answer.

 

[Ion]

no. I am right.

lets take a look at your rules;

Heads or tails?

so there are the rules in total. as an omniscient being i know already the answer is heads. and i am correct, the answer is heads.

you, on the other hand are incorrect. because you neglected to include in your rules the statement that you would be choosing the opposite of my prediction.
and as you say, look at your rules, if it is not in the rules i am to ignore it.
therefore i am correct and ‘heads’ is the correct answer.

Thats the part where if it doesn’t happen what tyrion wants to do then it means he doesn’t have free will. The part is whisy-washy so it wouldn’t be that evident that is not the free will to choose something independently ( i will choose a dice etc) but the will against god is in action. If you will is against my will then there is no choice but competition between us. Thats against common sense. My free will is to win the marathon at olympics but in this oppresive society, i cant; those guys were supposed to run behind me all the time…

 

[CandideWest]

no. I am right.

lets take a look at your rules;

Heads or tails?

Nope, again it would really help if you actually read my posts before you write your replies. It’d help avoid trivial errors like this. Here are the rules again, quoted verbatim from post 167.

"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. "

So yes, you predicted the result would be heads. I chose the result as tails. So you were wrong. Exactly as per the rules.

so there are the rules in total. as an omniscient being i know already the answer is heads. and i am correct, the answer is heads.

you, on the other hand are incorrect. because you neglected to include in your rules the statement that you would be choosing the opposite of my prediction.

Fingers crossed you’ll read the rules this time and note that is in fact in the rules.

and as you say, look at your rules, if it is not in the rules i am to ignore it.
therefore i am correct and ‘heads’ is the correct answer.

Sure, you don’t need to worry about things not in the rules, but you do need to comply with the rules. So you make your prediction, then I choose the correct answer.

But I’ll grant you didn’t understand the rules at the first attempt so we’ll reset the scores (aren’t I nice).

Candide West 0 - 0 Paddy Walker

Now that you do (hopefully) understand the rules, fancy playing again?

Heads or tails?

 

[Ion]

Nope, again it would really help if you actually read my posts before you write your replies. It’d help avoid trivial errors like this. Here are the rules again, quoted verbatim from post 167.

"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. "

So yes, you predicted the result would be heads. I chose the result as tails. So you were wrong. Exactly as per the rules.

Fingers crossed you’ll read the rules this time and note that is in fact in the rules.

Sure, you don’t need to worry about things not in the rules, but you do need to comply with the rules. So you make your prediction, then I choose the correct answer.

But I’ll grant you didn’t understand the rules at the first attempt so we’ll reset the scores (aren’t I nice).

Candide West 0 - 0 Paddy Walker

Now that you do (hopefully) understand the rules, fancy playing again?

Heads or tails?

As I stated in my previous post, that bolded “choose” is not free will, but action against god, because of will against god. Thats competion! And in your setting god is supposed to “stay behind”, why would he? Like I said with the marathon, all the folks are supposed to run behind me bcause I “free will” to win…

 

[CandideWest]

As I stated in my previous post, that bolded “choose” is not free will, but action against god, because of will against god. Thats competion! And in your setting god is supposed to “stay behind”, why would he? Like I said with the marathon, all the folks are supposed to run behind me bcause I “free will” to win…

He won’t “stay behind” as I have repeatedly stated, under the described circumstances God would presumably simply say “I cannot correctly answer your question as the correct answer is contingent upon and inverse to whatever answer I provide”. Or something similar.

 

[Ion]

He won’t “stay behind” as I have repeatedly stated, under the described circumstances God would presumably simply say “I cannot correctly answer your question as the correct answer is contingent upon and inverse to whatever answer I provide”. Or something similar.

Thats your imagination; if the competition clearly states that i “have to run behind you” (do only what you say) i wouldn’t participate. Why would anybody in a right mind?

 

[zro_x]

Thats your imagination; if the competition clearly states that i “have to run behind you” (do only what you say) i wouldn’t participate. Why would anybody in a right mind?

This is not a question of whether God would participate. this is a question of whether God could participate

 

[CandideWest]

Thats your imagination; if the competition clearly states that i “have to run behind you” (do only what you say) i wouldn’t participate. Why would anybody in a right mind?

Exactly.

That’s what I keep saying. I expect God would do the same (decline to answer Tyrions question on the basis that he cannot answer it correctly).

 

[CandideWest]

This is not a question of whether God would participate. this is a question of whether God could participate

Hang on, he can participate if he likes, but he just cannot give the right answer. So he (like anyone else) could play my coin flipping game. He just couldn’t win it.

 

[zro_x]

Hang on, he can participate if he likes, but he just cannot give the right answer. So he (like anyone else) could play my coin flipping game. He just couldn’t win it.

I had forgotten to consider that, but it may still be true that God can’t participate in the game. In order to do so, he would have to give a false prediction about what would happen. In other words, God would need to lie.

Many Christians believe that God is logically necessary. If he is, then it follows that his attributes are also logically necessary. And that means that it might somehow be logically impossible for God to lie.

 

[Ion]

Hang on, he can participate if he likes, but he just cannot give the right answer. So he (like anyone else) could play my coin flipping game. He just couldn’t win it.

Then your game is a non-sense. And you are free to think of non sense things. You are free to believe in non-sense things and in things that are in themselves contradictory ( i will win a competition in which it is stated up front there is no other possibility, whatever would you do would be against of the rules of the competition- thats not a competition anymore). You are even free to believe you don’t exist…What your imagination produces, it’s all yours. If I do not want to participate in your competition, then your imagination will be nothing, only empty words.
Actually you can imagine that the competition did take place and you won, whats the difference?

 

[tdgesq]

Hang on, he can participate if he likes, but he just cannot give the right answer. So he (like anyone else) could play my coin flipping game. He just couldn’t win it.

God could give the right answer to everyone except the OP. God would also know the right answer. It seems all this demonstrates is that God couldn’t give the correct response to the OP under the conditions specified, because to do otherwise would be logically impossible.

I would say this is the biggest non-event I’ve seen yet on the forums; but I’m afraid that isn’t true.

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Nope, again it would really help if you actually read my posts before you write your replies. It’d help avoid trivial errors like this. Here are the rules again, quoted verbatim from post 167.

"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. "

So yes, you predicted the result would be heads. I chose the result as tails. So you were wrong. Exactly as per the rules.

Fingers crossed you’ll read the rules this time and note that is in fact in the rules.

Sure, you don’t need to worry about things not in the rules, but you do need to comply with the rules. So you make your prediction, then I choose the correct answer.

But I’ll grant you didn’t understand the rules at the first attempt so we’ll reset the scores (aren’t I nice).

Candide West 0 - 0 Paddy Walker

Now that you do (hopefully) understand the rules, fancy playing again?

Heads or tails?

no problem.

your rules;

Rules; - "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. "

i flip the coin and it spins in the air, i call heads. you choose to make me wrong by causing the coin flip to land on tails. and this goes on ad finitum.

but wait a minute. i am the Omniscient one, not you. and with Omniscience comes Omnipotence and all other Godlike powers.
while you actually have no power at all without me. so, while i call heads you choose tails but you have no power to make it tails. i must make the result tails for you. and since i make the result tails for you i also know the result is tails. and so, i am, in fact doubly correct, in calling heads as the actual correct outcome and for causing tails to actually come up because that is what you wanted.
so in fact, my Omniscience is demonstrated to me, i have both predicted the correct outcome and seen the correct outcome as you see it.

 

[CandideWest]

I had forgotten to consider that, but it may still be true that God can’t participate in the game. In order to do so, he would have to give a false prediction about what would happen. In other words, God would need to lie.

Many Christians believe that God is logically necessary. If he is, then it follows that his attributes are also logically necessary. And that means that it might somehow be logically impossible for God to lie.

Hmmm, interesting. You may have a point there, but I don’t think that the bible would support that God cannot lie. The bible seems to say that he does lie, at least by proxy.

1 Kings 22:23
Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.

2 Chronicles 18:22
Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.

Ezekiel 14:9
And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.

2 Thessalonians 2:11
For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.

In either case, we seem to be agreed that God could not correctly answer the question, it just remains to be determined whether he could choose to answer the question incorrectly or if he would be unable to answer at all.

 

[CandideWest]

Then your game is a non-sense. And you are free to think of non sense things. You are free to believe in non-sense things and in things that are in themselves contradictory ( i will win a competition in which it is stated up front there is no other possibility, whatever would you do would be against of the rules of the competition- thats not a competition anymore). You are even free to believe you don’t exist…What your imagination produces, it’s all yours.

No, it makes perfect sense, it’s just rigged. As i have said at the outset and several times since. That was the entire point of Tyrions original argument. He created a rigged system where it was impossible for God to provide the correct answer.

I think we’ve finally reached an accord

If I do not want to participate in your competition, then your imagination will be nothing, only empty words.
Actually you can imagine that the competition did take place and you won, whats the difference?

Exactly, you can and presumably will decline to play a game where the rules are openly rigged to ensure that you will never win. Just as God would presumably decline to answer a question which is openly rigged to ensure he will not provide the correct answer.

 

[CandideWest]

God could give the right answer to everyone except the OP. God would also know the right answer. It seems all this demonstrates is that God couldn’t give the correct response to the OP under the conditions specified, because to do otherwise would be logically impossible.

Yep. As i said before, the only progress Tyrion seems to have made is to show that it is not possible for even and omnipotent God to demonstrate his omniscience to a skeptical audience.

I would say this is the biggest non-event I’ve seen yet on the forums; but I’m afraid that isn’t true.