Double trouble!

[Love4All]

…no, that’s not what the OP was asking. The OP asked if God can change a future that’s already set, and the premise is further muddied by the fact that the OP apparently knows, in this hypothetical scenario, exactly what God is thinking and saying.

It’s not valid, it’s just silly.

It is not silly. Jesus did the exact same thing to Saint Peter.

“Before the cock crows, you will deny me three times.”

“No I won’t.”

But we know what happened.

 

[Love4All]

The thing I don’t get is that if I am told the future, then isn’t that future the one in which I knew about the future? So if it is about me performing a particular action sometime in the future then didn’t I perform that action after being told about the future?

Doesn’t the OP assert that God somehow makes the future a variable if he makes a prediction known because anyone can use that knowledge to change something, as if, the future had been one where God had not revealed his prediction?

Isn’t the truth rather, that if God told Tyrion what he was going to do, then for unknown reasons, Tyrion actually does decide to do that when the time comes, even though it doesn’t seem conceivable to him yet. Because, isn’t God actually seeing the future after he told Tyrion?

Yes. Exactly. But Candide will never accept it.

 

[tdgesq]

…did he just ignore our point about the question falling short of his intended target?

Lol. Yes, conveniently he did. Here is what he sought to prove:

Now, of course this is all contingent upon God “playing” the game. If he refuses to participate, then he admits that he cannot “prove” his so-called and assumed “omniscience”. And that refutes God’s omnipotence.

Assuming for argument’s sake that God refusing to play = an admission he cannot prove his omniscience (uh, it would show he does not prove his omniscience); Tyrion still doesn’t get the job done. All he has proven is that God cannot answer a question correctly when the answer will always be different than God’s. Of course, requiring God to answer what is by definition an unanswerable question would be to require God to engage in a logical contradiction. Since Christian theists readily admit that God’s omnipotence doesn’t include an ability to engage in a logical contradiction, Tyrion’s argument against God’s omnipotence fails.

Moreover, even if one accepts God’s word without proof, then it is obvious that God’s omniscience is contingent upon NOT revealing his knowledge. (Which makes God contingent.)

This is Tyrion’s second assertion. It suffers from a variety of defects, not the least of which is that God may remain silent on the matter, in which case there aren’t any implications for God’s omniscience. But even if God were to answer Tyrion’s skeptical challenge and say “I cannot answer that question correctly, because you will always offer a different answer,” it still doesn’t mean God doesn’t know what the correct answer is. It does not show that God’s knowledge is contingent upon Tyrion’s answer. Tyrion’s argument against God’s omniscience fails.

Now something very curious happens. Tyrion appears again to argue an ostensibly different conclusion than before. Here it is:

In this thread it is stipulated that an event of free will is possible to predict. But as it turned out it is only possible under certain circumstances. And that contradicts God’s alleged “absolute” nature. As it is proven now, God can - at most - only make an accurate prediction, if he DOES NOT reveal that prediction beforehand. As such God’s ability to make an accurate prediction is CONTINGENT upon keeping that prediction “secret”. And since God is “simple” (has no parts), therefore God is CONTINGENT.

Now, what are we to make of this? Apparently the thought experiment is now held to prove that God’s absolute (non-contingent) nature is compromised. But what is it exactly about God that is contingent? Apparently it is God’s ability to correctly answer Tyrion’s question to Tyrion. And what is it contingent upon? It is contingent upon Tyrion not changing his answer to conflict with God’s. A number of problems here.

God is not required to answer. Tyrion could argue that if God wanted to correctly answer Tyrion, he couldn’t. But that is a conditional proposition, and it proves nothing about whether God’s acts (of any kind - even lack of action) are really contingent upon Tyrion’s acts. Perhaps more importantly, I find it highly doubtful that God’s decision to act based upon a free human response is a contingency that would compromise the “absolute” nature of God. There is also the not-so-small problem that it is stipulated that Tyrion always will choose an answer opposed to God’s, making any kind of contingency illusory at best.

So . . . . omniscience, omnipotence and “absoluteness” survive unscathed . . . . again.

 

[JamesATyler]

That’s the thing that bugs me about the thought experiment. Some other guy went to great lengths to point out that God’s prediction comes BEFORE Tyrion’s decision. This asserts that God only predicts a possible future not the actual future.

If the future is to really be the future then when God tells his prediction to Tyrion, he is already viewing the future after Tyrion has been told.

So even though the prediction is BEFORE Tyrions decision, the content of the prophesy is the action which Tyrion takes AFTER the prediction. So it can’t be wrong. For God it’s all history in a way.

 

[Love4All]

Consider the Book of Jonah.

Jonah, with free will, decided to contradict God’s command. God allowed it. Then God punished him. Then the punishment was over, and God again gave Jonah the same command.

What did Jonah then do with his free will?

There are literally countless ways for God to cause any creature to do any thing whatsoever with free will. God is omnipotent. Some here seem not to have any kind of a grasp on what that word actually means.

 

[CandideWest]

Still I wonder what God would say. None of us are omniscient. At any rate, I not going to rule out God’s ability to answer Tyrion’s questions without first hearing from God.

Fair enough. All the best.

 

[CandideWest]

You actually think Tyrion’s “question” was valid?

Of course it is. It is a simple clear question with a single correct answer. Nothing wrong with that.

The fact that Tyrion has decided to choose to make any answer given by a particular respondee incorrect has no bearing on the validity of the question itself. It simply means that Tyrion is being unfair by setting conditions which cannot be met. But the question itself is perfectly valid.

 

[CandideWest]

…no, that’s not what the OP was asking. The OP asked if God can change a future that’s already set, and the premise is further muddied by the fact that the OP apparently knows, in this hypothetical scenario, exactly what God is thinking and saying.

It’s not valid, it’s just silly.

No, that isn’t what the OP is asking at all. The OP is asking God to answer a question about the outcome of a future decision. Tyrion has set this up so that this decision is contingent upon and inverse to whatever prediction is made.

I agree the way he worded it is a little muddled but nonetheless it does still work.

 

[Lochias]

Of course it is. It is a simple clear question with a single correct answer. Nothing wrong with that.

The fact that Tyrion has decided to choose to make any answer given by a particular respondee incorrect has no bearing on the validity of the question itself. It simply means that Tyrion is being unfair by setting conditions which cannot be met. But the question itself is perfectly valid.

Don’t agree. A question serves to find information, and Tyrion’s question cannot, by its very nature, fulfill its purpose. There -is- no correct answer for his / her question.

 

[Love4All]

Don’t agree. A question serves to find information, and Tyrion’s question cannot, by its very nature, fulfill its purpose. There -is- no correct answer for his / her question.

No, this is wrong. There is a perfectly valid answer to Tyrion’s question, and it is the prediction of Tyrion’s future free-will decision. Tyrion thinks, in his insolence, and Candide agrees, that Tyrion can accurately predict his own future free-will decision.

But he won’t. Tyrion, by posing his question, has set HIMSELF up for failure. It is not God who will fail; it is Tyrion.

 

[Love4All]

Of course it is. It is a simple clear question with a single correct answer. Nothing wrong with that.

The fact that Tyrion has decided to choose to make any answer given by a particular respondee incorrect has no bearing on the validity of the question itself. It simply means that Tyrion is being unfair by setting conditions which cannot be met. But the question itself is perfectly valid.

Tyrion’s decision to choose to make any answer given by a particular respondent incorrect fails to magically confer on Tyrion the power to make any answer given by a particular respondent incorrect.

God 1 Tyrion 0.

 

[CandideWest]

Kindly do not place your words in my mouth. I have consistently maintained that God cannot possibly be incorrect. There is no possible world where Tyrion chooses contrary to God’s foreknowledge.

Which is contrary to your previously stated position “If we stipulate, as a given, that Tyrion can choose A or B, then there are necessarily some possible worlds where he chooses A, and others where he chooses B.”

My answer is that of course, he is able to choose B, by definition of “choose.” If there are no options, there can be no choice.

Right, great. Well done.

FULL STOP.

Your parenthetical is NOT a legitimate re-expression of my answer.

God’s prediction is correct. Period.

There are possible worlds wherein Tyrion chooses A, and possible worlds where Tyrion chooses B. With me so far?

Great. So to run through this from the start, you just stated that there are possible worlds where

1. Tyrion asks God “Am I going to choose A or B?”
2. God says “you’re going to choose A”
3. Tyrion chooses B.

There are no possible worlds where my first statement is incorrect. God’s prediction is correct, in all possible worlds. That is the ONLY factor in any of what we’ve discussed that is true in all possible worlds.

And flipflop we’re back the other side again.

Once again you cannot have it both ways. Lets slow things down for you, the important bit is the one you keep skipping right over. Here is the situation we have got to so far, lets go a step at a time OK?

1. Tyrion asks God “Am I going to choose A or B?”
2. God says “you’re going to choose A”
3. Tyrion makes his decision.

So, we are at the decision point. God has predicted that Tyrion will choose “A”. Is it now possible (are there possible worlds) where Tyrion picks B? If you can answer that one question with a simple “yes” or “no”. Then we can move forwards.

That is absolutely absurd. You have, as I already pointed out to you several posts ago, arbitrarily removed T’s free will by fiat. You have declared, without any supporting logic, that it is “impossible” for him to choose B. What removed his free will?

Sigh, I’ve done nothing of the sort. I’ll walk you through this once you’ve answered the question above.

God cannot answer the question, “which answer will you not give?” because that question is not legitimate; rather, it is a paradox of negative self-reference.

No, the question is valid, there are a defined set of correct answers. That it is impossible to answer correctly is just the odd nature of that particular question.

False, and again I will ask you kindly to cease and desist from placing YOUR words in MY mouth.

My consistent position is:

1. God is always right.
2. Tyrion is free.
3. God has infallible foreknowledge of every one of Tyrion’s future free will decisions.

The problem lies in the 1. and 2. are contradictory. Hence why you’re being forced to argue both sides. But don’t worry we’ll get to this by going along step by step.

 

[CandideWest]

I agree that you are being silly, but I don’t think you quite yet grasp how.

This is just childish and needs no reply. If you are correct you arguments will do the talking. If you are incorrect statements like the one above make you look very foolish.

I am certain that this kind of thought is one of the lynchpins of your atheism, and I am doing my best to remove it. I have been assuming that you actually respect logic, and wish to hold true thoughts as opposed to errors. PLEASE don’t tell me I was wrong about that! But if I am actually wrong, please do tell me, and I’ll stop wasting my time on you.

More of the same.

There are no correct utilizations of possible worlds scenarios where they change in the middle of the scenario.

Nor have I tried to do anything of the sort. In case you weren’t aware many worlds comes from quantum theory, the idea of the universe splitting at a point and both sets of possibilities happening. Remember Schrodingers cat?

The point at which to apply many worlds theory in the thought experiment at hand is at the decision point - the point where Tyrion makes his decision. Again we’ll do best to go through this using the step by step approach from my previous post.

Cite one.

??? God would answer with “Cite one.” ??? That’s an odd answer and since you just gave it, incorrect.

You are incorrect in your assessment of the validity of that question.

Surely you acknowledge that there are correct answers to the question? Answers which will never be given? Sequences of millions or billions of characters arranged in completely random patterns which nobody is ever going to write out… those are all correct answers to the question. Of course if you actually write one down to use it as an answer, then that particular one is wrong… but there are still an infinite array of other correct answers out there.

You wish to assert that there are valid questions that God will be unable to answer. You just can’t state one. So what is there for me to argue?

We have been talking about one for days already, I thought you would have spotted it. I’ve also given one above. Did you not notice that either? Even when you tried to answer it with “Cite one.”?

But since it is likely you do not yet grasp the invalid nature of your second question, consider: what would be a legitimate answer? “17,” you say, arbitrarily. That negates itself, and because you gave it, it is an answer that would be given, it is not correct. A question with no correct answer cannot be valid.

And therein lies you error. There ARE correct answers. There are an infinite number of correct answers. But any of those that are picked out and given automatically become incorrect. I’m thinking of an answer right now which i’m pretty much certain is correct but if I actually give it as an answer then it would be wrong.

Funnily enough the question is actually a lot like science, we can only prove theories incorrect, we can never prove them to be correct. Only an omniscient being could “know” a theory to be correct.

In the same way I can prove answers incorrect by giving them, think of answers to the question which are very likely correct just because they are so obscure but I can never KNOW it is correct, the way I could KNOW that you just made “Cite one.” incorrect. Only an omniscient being could KNOW if an answer was correct or not.

 

[CandideWest]

Don’t agree. A question serves to find information, and Tyrion’s question cannot, by its very nature, fulfill its purpose. There -is- no correct answer for his / her question.

There is a correct answer, at some point Tyrion WILL pick A or B.

 

[polytropos]

Is the proper syntax and content all that make a question valid? Is a valid question always valid?

If I ask, “On which side of the table is the book sitting?”–and there is no book on the table–is the question valid, ie. does there necessarily exist a “correct” answer about the position of the book (which is not there)? The correct response might be that there is no book on the table.

I think calling Tyrion’s question “valid” based on the structure he has imposed on the experiment is absurd. If God were to give an answer pertaining to the nature of Tyrion’s dice roll, and Tyrion were to act contrary to that prediction, the answer cannot be right–even though one could conceive other contexts in which Tyrion’s question is valid, it is not valid in this context. The correct answer may not be a prediction about the dice roll (the analogue of “The book is on the left side of the table.”) but an acknowledgment that Tyrion’s choice has already been made. Tyrion’s choice was not about rolling the dice one way or the other but to attempt to act contrary to the word of God. He does not make a choice after the prediction; he just follows his previous choice.

 

[CandideWest]

Tyrion’s decision to choose to make any answer given by a particular respondent incorrect fails to magically confer on Tyrion the power to make any answer given by a particular respondent incorrect.

God 1 Tyrion 0.

Again you have misunderstood.

Hopefully it’ll become clearer for you if we go through step by step as per my post above. I’m a patient guy. Slow and steady wins the race sometimes

 

[JamesATyler]

It seems like to me, that if God says that Tyrion will choose A then there are no possible worlds where Tyrion chooses B. For what ever reason, Tyrion decides to choose A. If Tyrion claims he won’t choose A then he must be telling a lie because we know that God doesn’t lie.

In his original post, Tyrion is telling a lie when he says he will do something different than what God predicts. Conclusion, Tyrion is a liar. That’s more believable than God predicting wrong.

 

[Love4All]

Which is contrary to your previously stated position “If we stipulate, as a given, that Tyrion can choose A or B, then there are necessarily some possible worlds where he chooses A, and others where he chooses B.”

Not in the least. Either choice is possible. What is not possible is for God not to know it.

Right, great. Well done.

So you agree that Tyrion can choose. Remember that, because you wish to lose it, and I won’t let you.

Great. So to run through this from the start, you just stated that there are possible worlds where

1. Tyrion asks God “Am I going to choose A or B?”
2. God says “you’re going to choose A”
3. Tyrion chooses B.

Again: every time you put your words in my mouth, you screw it up somehow.

There are no possible worlds wherein (A /\ ~A). That is a contradiction. Reality contains no contradictions. Thus any world containing a contradiction is not a possible world.

So: there are possible worlds wherein 1 above. There are possible worlds wherein 2. There are possible worlds wherein 3. There are NO possible worlds wherein 2 AND 3, because 2 and 3 are contradictory.

And flipflop we’re back the other side again.

It would be amusing to observe the workings of your brain whereby you create flip-flops in my utterly self-consistent position. But that is neither here nor there.

Once again you cannot have it both ways. Lets slow things down for you, the important bit is the one you keep skipping right over. Here is the situation we have got to so far, lets go a step at a time OK?

1. Tyrion asks God “Am I going to choose A or B?”
2. God says “you’re going to choose A”
3. Tyrion makes his decision.

That, in contrast to what you stated above, IS a possible set of consistent propositions in some possible world.

So, we are at the decision point. God has predicted that Tyrion will choose “A”. Is it now possible (are there possible worlds) where Tyrion picks B?

Try to follow: Yes.

However, I am fairly convinced that you didn’t ask the question you meant to ask. I answered your question correctly, but I believe what you meant to ask me is:

"Are there possible worlds where Tyrion picks B AND God said, “you’re going to choose A.”?

The answer to THAT question — different from the question you asked me — is plainly, “No.”

However — and this is a very, very important point, which I am nearly certain that you are going to object to, even though you will be unable to say why — Tyrion is free to choose either option. God’s prediction, to Tyrion’s face, of what Tyrion does in fact choose, does not negate the fact that Tyrion is free to choose either option. He just, will not in fact choose the option that God does not predict. He might plan to, but when the time comes to actually decide, he won’t.

If you can answer that one question with a simple “yes” or “no”. Then we can move forwards.

Well, the answer, as we see, is not quite so simple. And that is because, while you were pretending to ask a simple question, what you really meant to ask, wasn’t. The question you really meant to ask was complex. It was not, “can Tyrion choose B?” but rather, “can Tyrion choose B, given that Tyrion chooses A?”

Of course he cannot choose both (we are assuming, and I think it is consistent with the gist of the setup), because that would entail a contradiction.

Given that he chooses either A or B and not both, then if he chooses A, he does not choose B, and vice versa.

But to make the point I’ve been trying in oh-so-many ways to make, that wasn’t the original dilemma. The original dilemma was not,

Given that Tyrion chooses A or B and not both, does he choose both?

The original dilemma was,

Given that Tyrion wishes to ask God a legitimate question that God can’t answer, can he do it?

And the simple answer is, no, of course not. God is omnipotent. He can do anything.

Now, he can certainly ask God questions that are NOT legitimate, that God can’t answer. But I don’t think that’s what you and he were trying to prove.

Can reality contradict itself? is a legitimate question, and the answer is “NO.”

God predicting Tyrion will choose A, and Tyrion choosing B, would be an example of reality contradicting itself.

Sigh, I’ve done nothing of the sort. I’ll walk you through this once you’ve answered the question above.

No, the question is valid, there are a defined set of correct answers. That it is impossible to answer correctly is just the odd nature of that particular question.

Explain to me how a question that is impossible to answer correctly is legitimate.

The problem lies in the 1. and 2. are contradictory. Hence why you’re being forced to argue both sides. But don’t worry we’ll get to this by going along step by step.

Ah! THANK YOU for finally exposing your real problem.

You wish to argue — have been wishing all along to argue — that if God is omniscient, free will cannot be real.

You can drop the pretense now of having a different agenda. We can address your real issue directly.

Your fallacy, as I pointed out a long time ago, rests on your conflation of “will” with “must.”

They are not the same thing. Let that sink in, and if you really grasp what I just said, we can save a lot of time. But if you are not yet able to grasp it, let us continue. But let us acknowledge what the “double trouble” really is for you. It is not whether Tyrion’s argument has weight. It is that you fail to grasp the consistency of the real world, wherein God is omniscient and we are all free.

 

[Love4All]

In case you weren’t aware many worlds comes from quantum theory, the idea of the universe splitting at a point and both sets of possibilities happening. Remember Schrodingers cat?

The point at which to apply many worlds theory in the thought experiment at hand is at the decision point - the point where Tyrion makes his decision. Again we’ll do best to go through this using the step by step approach from my previous post.

Many-worlds interpretation is one interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.

Possible worlds is a philosophical device.

They are NOT the same things! They are similar only in name. Perhaps you should stop conflating them.

We are not discussing QM, so we won’t be using MWI. We are discussing philosophical hypotheticals, and possible worlds scenarios will serve us just fine, if only we can both begin using them correctly.

??? God would answer with “Cite one.” ??? That’s an odd answer and since you just gave it, incorrect.

I wasn’t giving you a possible answer. I was requesting of you to cite a possible correct answer.

And, you can’t. Thanks for playing!

Surely you acknowledge that there are correct answers to the question? Answers which will never be given?

If it isn’t given, how is it an answer?

Sequences of millions or billions of characters arranged in completely random patterns which nobody is ever going to write out… those are all correct answers to the question.

Not if they are not given as answers. What is an answer?

Joe: “What are you thinking?”

Schmoe: ". . . . "

Joe: “Are you going to answer me??”

Schmoe: “. . . .”

Joe: “Fine, then DON’T ANSWER ME!”

Schmoe: “Sorry, I was thinking.”

Joe: “What were you thinking?”

Schmoe: “I was thinking, should I answer his question, or not?”

Of course if you actually write one down to use it as an answer, then that particular one is wrong… but there are still an infinite array of other correct answers out there.

Answers that cannot be answered. Like the sound of one hand clapping, or the face you had before you were born.

Paradoxes are an awful lot of fun, aren’t they? But what do they prove? Not what you’re going for.

We have been talking about one for days already, I thought you would have spotted it. I’ve also given one above. Did you not notice that either? Even when you tried to answer it with “Cite one.”?

That was a request of you, not an answer.

While this is perhaps an interesting diversion from topic, it is starting to get tedious. Your question, “what answer will not be given?” has nothing whatsoever to do with the OP. Since it is actually getting tedious by now and less fun, I really don’t care to analyze it any more. I hope you understand. Let’s get back to topic, and let’s see if we can find a good grinder for your personal ax.

And therein lies you error. There ARE correct answers. There are an infinite number of correct answers. But any of those that are picked out and given automatically become incorrect. I’m thinking of an answer right now which i’m pretty much certain is correct but if I actually give it as an answer then it would be wrong.

Funnily enough the question is actually a lot like science, we can only prove theories incorrect, we can never prove them to be correct. Only an omniscient being could “know” a theory to be correct.

In the same way I can prove answers incorrect by giving them, think of answers to the question which are very likely correct just because they are so obscure but I can never KNOW it is correct, the way I could KNOW that you just made “Cite one.” incorrect. Only an omniscient being could KNOW if an answer was correct or not.

God says, “The one I am not thinking.”

That isn’t the answer, that is a description of the answer. What is being described cannot be expressed. “Nothing” is not a thing.

 

[Love4All]

Again you have misunderstood.

Hopefully it’ll become clearer for you if we go through step by step as per my post above. I’m a patient guy. Slow and steady wins the race sometimes

Are you scientifically minded? Let’s find out, shall we?

How would you go about answering the following?

“What happens when an immovable object meets an irresistible force?”

There IS a scientific answer. I have practically given it away. But I’d like to hear your thoughts.