Free will only permitted when full knowledge available!

[Reep]

As near as I can tell, most of my failings have nothing to do with incomplete knowledge. They seem quite clear-cut and I know without doubt when I am not cutting it.

Also, it seems that once God has helped me past a current sin, the Holy Spirit brings the next one (of which I was less conscious) to my attention. So, I think my work is pretty well cut out for me.

As for knowledge, I think we are given enough. As for complete knowledge, none of us has any hope of that.

 

[John121]

1730 God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions.

Missing the point if God created us with the law written on our heart and created us with rational minds then why do people have to study the law ie theology and philosophy to develop reason.

I prevent myself from acting because I have learnt what is wrong and when the decision to choose what to do comes to me I choose the right thing to do because I know what to do because I study theology and the law and tried learning the 10 commandments off by heart this decision to choose right with my free will is only possible when I know what is the truth according to God by way of knowledge this is my point and very valid children are not culpable for sin because they don’t have knowledge of right and wrong and people who are seriously ill such as dementia are also not culpable as there knowledge is missing.

 

[John121]

I don’t think you understand that people are like sponges we absorb what we’re told and act according to that truth so ya if I was told we are animals that God is imaginary the Bible made up by people and it’s the survival of the fittest and self interest is about the goal in life I’m pretty sure that is valid enough as a person not thought proper morals which come from the Bible.

you act according to what you know and you know according to what you are learnt.

Menos paradox states we can’t know what we don’t know because we don’t know it.

Not knowing morals which are right action according to God is a perfectly good example of lack of education and not having the ability to choose how can one choose if they don’t have the choice to pick the right morals if one does not know them.

So I would argue with God that knowledge of right and wrong would have to be present in order to have free will!

 

[Bradskii]

I don’t think you understand that people are like sponges we absorb what we’re told and act according to that truth so ya if I was told we are animals that God is imaginary the Bible made up by people and it’s the survival of the fittest and self interest is about the goal in life I’m pretty sure that is valid enough as a person not thought proper morals which come from the Bible.

As Hoosier said, this is abject nonsense. You are suggesting that you can’t tell right from wrong unless someone sits you down and explains it to you. And quite horrifyingly you also suggest that if someone tells you that it’s the survival of the strongest then you soak that up like a sponge and feel free to carry on with no attempt to think about what is morally correct or not.

If you are using a purported lack of knowledge of the ‘rules’ of morality to justify doing wrong then you really need to seek some help. ‘No-one told me it was wrong!’ will get you nowhere my friend.

 

[Vico]

… if God created us with the law written on our heart and created us with rational minds then why do people have to … develop reason. …

So as you said there is culpability for sin when it is done through free will choice, but only when there is knowledge that is a sin, but also there must be sufficient reflection, enough for it to be a personal choice. Although, as St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, vincible ignorance can also be a sin.

Reply to objection 2: If the ignorance be such as to excuse sin altogether, as the ignorance of a madman or an imbecile, then he that commits fornication in a state of such ignorance, commits no sin either mortal or venial. But if the ignorance be not invincible, then the ignorance itself is a sin, and contains within itself the lack of the love of God, in so far as a man neglects to learn those things whereby he can safeguard himself in the love of God.

Summa Theologiae > First Part of the Second Part > Question 88 > Article 6

The Catechism expresses the same:

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1801 Conscience can remain in ignorance or make erroneous judgments. Such ignorance and errors are not always free of guilt.

1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.

1785 In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.55

 

[John121]

Excellent that was exactly what I was thinking I really need to study the catechism.

In my case ignorance of the law of God was a result of being thought incorrectly I eventually came to the realization through studying what it is to be a perfect human after spending 16 hours or more reading every day for two years books and the web about the meaning of life I came to who the most virtues people are and the truth was 48 middot virtues of the Torah led me to believe in Jesus being perfect and God.

 

[Bradskii]

Not having full knowledge does NOT preclude free will. You can choose to do something whether you know it’s right or wrong.

Your position appears to be that it’s not your fault you do wrong because no-one told you. Which is a concern on two levels.

One, that you need to be told. And two, that you appear to suggest that you automatically consider something to be right or wrong purely on their say so without putting any thought into it yourself.

 

[John121]

Literally the man above just explained using the catechism the ignorance of something if it’s not your fault makes a sin sinless!

My point has always been is that if you don’t have the ability to choose then ones freewill isn’t limited or not present.

Ie is a robot who is programmed to do one action have free will the answer is no

Knowledge creates choices a absence of this knowledge creates less choices or no choice

 

[John121]

Why is there so much atheists on a religious site that’s just bizarre trying to persuade people of a lie ?

 

[Bradskii]

Literally the man above just explained using the catechism the ignorance of something if it’s not your fault makes a sin sinless!

My point has always been is that if you don’t have the ability to choose then ones freewill isn’t limited or not present.

Ie is a robot who is programmed to do one action have free will the answer is no

Knowledge creates choices a absence of this knowledge creates less choices or no choice

But we’re not talking about playing ball in the park when it is not allowed. You specifically mentioned survival of the fittest (which actually means the survival of thost most fitted to their environment - but skip that) as if someone had told you that was a biological requirement and that unless someone told you differently then you needn’t question it but act apon that (misinterpreted) basis.

Surely John, you know right from wrong. You don’t need to be told.

 

[Bradskii]

Why is there so much atheists on a religious site that’s just bizarre trying to persuade people of a lie ?

There aren’t any atheists on this site trying to pursuade you that your beliefs are erroneous. We just like a chat.

 

[goout]

John121:

Why is there so much atheists on a religious site that’s just bizarre trying to persuade people of a lie ?

There aren’t any atheists on this site trying to pursuade you that your beliefs are erroneous. We just like a chat.

Ok. yes. Just a chat with no truth claims. ok…

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

John121:

Why is there so much atheists on a religious site that’s just bizarre trying to persuade people of a lie ?

There aren’t any atheists on this site trying to pursuade you that your beliefs are erroneous. We just like a chat.

Ok. yes. Just a chat with no truth claims. ok…

I’ll certainly tell you what I think is the truth. But I am most definitely not here to change your religious beliefs.

 

[goout]

I think you sell yourself short.
Your claims have the same flavor of conviction and persuasion as anyone else’s.

 

[Bradskii]

I think you sell yourself short.
Your claims have the same flavor of conviction and persuasion as anyone else’s.

I’d like to think so. They have been developed over many decades. I don’t treat them lightly. I grant everyone else the same assumption regarding their religious beliefs.

But as you know, in the spirit of open and reasonable discussion, I feel free to question anyone else’s beliefs as they are free to question mine.

I find that helps to clarify my own positions. Let’s hope it works for others in the same way as well.

 

[John121]

Surely John, you know right from wrong. You don’t need to be told.

Of course you need to be told right from wrong from the beginning of time we were giving instruction the Jewish people have 613 commandments the gentiles have 10 but split into many smaller commandments

 

[John_Martin]

But we’re not talking about playing ball in the park when it is not allowed. You specifically mentioned survival of the fittest (which actually means the survival of thost most fitted to their environment - but skip that) as if someone had told you that was a biological requirement and that unless someone told you differently then you needn’t question it but act apon that (misinterpreted) basis.

Surely John[121], you know right from wrong. You don’t need to be told.

I agree; were we devoid of ‘knowing’ we would be beasts (animals). Knowing (thinking about and regarding) what you are going to do, doing, and have done, makes an act a ‘human act’. (https://softvocation.org/2018/05/24/knowing/). And, as for knowing natural law, it is not a specifically “Catholic” thing, but it is a “human thing” (even Atheists realize what is moral or not, within a culture that “knows” along with what it is doing [part of this link discusses “natural law”: Law and Grace | SoftVocation ] )

Free will: what I do I have myself chosen to do, and also, I have chosen to know what I myself want to know about what I have done, and by choosing what I myself choose I hope to attain some goal of my own desire.

John Martin

 

[John121]

God knows that if you put a baby in the middle of a mud pit and ask him to find his way out that child is going to get dirty.

The expected reality to have free will is the ability to make choices if no choices are available free will is not available.

The choice for example of stealing food to eat when unable to pay for food is a good choice if you have knowledge of the outcome being good because you eat which is a good thing if hungry and bad if you have knowledge of theft being a sin but if one does not have knowledge that theft when hungry is indeed bad the like the previous poster stated in the catechism this ignorance not caused on purpose is not a sin!

 

[Bradskii]

…were we devoid of ‘knowing’ we would be beasts…even Atheists realize what is moral or not…

Of course you need to be told right from wrong…

You guys sort it out. I’ll come back later to see what the outcome is.

 

[John_Martin]

if you put a baby in the middle of a mud pit and ask him to find his way out that child is going to get dirty.

The expected reality to have free will is the ability to make choices if no choices are available free will is not available.

The choice for example of stealing food to eat when unable to pay for food is a good choice if you have knowledge of the outcome being good because you eat which is a good thing if hungry and bad if you have knowledge of theft being a sin but if one does not have knowledge that theft when hungry is indeed bad the like the previous poster stated in the catechism this ignorance not caused on purpose is not a sin!

Oh, get serious; who puts their baby in a mud pit - are you “knowing”? are you “thinking”?
Who will not “steal” when starving? but who does not know that he must tell the “victim”, “I will repay you as soon as I am able, but if you cannot wait, I will suffer whatever you choose to do.”