Functional definability: free will in creation and God

[Bahman]

Functional definability means that output of the system is definable given the (name removed by moderator)ut.
Free will is the ability of making a decision given the circumstances or situation.

The question is whether free will in creation is functionally definable or not from God point of view. Functional definability is crucial for an intelligent design since one should know what is the outcome of a design in advance otherwise one has to strive on trial and error. This there is however a tension between functional definability and free will. In simple word we are not free if our decision is functionally definable and the intelligent design is not possible without functional definability.

 

[seagal]

Functional definability means that output of the system is definable given the (name removed by moderator)ut.
Free will is the ability of making a decision given the circumstances or situation.

The question is whether free will in creation is functionally definable or not from God point of view. Functional definability is crucial for an intelligent design since one should know what is the outcome of a design in advance otherwise one has to strive on trial and error. This there is however a tension between functional definability and free will. In simple word we are not free if our decision is functionally definable and the intelligent design is not possible without functional definability.

Once again, as has been pointed out several times in other threads,** knowing the outcome of a decision is not the same as causing it**. A scientist can combine 2 chemicals and know exactly what reaction will occur. Knowing doesn’t cause the reaction.

 

[Bahman]

Once again, as has been pointed out several times in other threads,** knowing the outcome of a decision is not the same** as causing it. A scientist can combine 2 chemicals and know exactly what reaction will occur. Knowing doesn’t cause the reaction.

You perhaps didn’t get what I meant with functional definability. Let put free will aside for a second to avoid the confusion.

What is functional definability? In simple word it means that there exist a function that can explain the behavior of a system. The question is existence of this function since one can claim that creation is not possible if this function does not exist. Why? Because either the act creation is intelligently designed which means that the outcome should exactly match with what was designed which means this function exist or it is not which means that the behavior of system is unknown to God so the question is how God can create something he cannot know.

 

[seagal]

You perhaps didn’t get what I meant with functional definability. Let put free will aside for a second to avoid the confusion.

What is functional definability? In simple word it means that there exist a function that can explain the behavior of a system. The question is existence of this function since one can claim that creation is not possible if this function does not exist. Why? Because either the act creation is intelligently designed which means that the outcome should exactly match with what was designed which means this function exist or it is not which means that the behavior of system is unknown to God so the question is how God can create something he cannot know.

My apologies if I misunderstood.
How can you determine if this function exists or not? If it does, it must necessarily be a function of the designer and how could that be proven? Only through knowing the intentions of the designer, since you said the outcome should exactly match the design. How is it possible to know the intentions of the designer?

 

[Bahman]

My apologies if I misunderstood.

You don’t need to apologize dude

How can you determine if this function exists or not? If it does, it must necessarily be a function of the designer and how could that be proven? Only through knowing the intentions of the designer, since you said the outcome should exactly match the design. How is it possible to know the intentions of the designer?

The function exists if there is a designing otherwise doesn’t exist. You are correct in saying that we cannot prove or disprove that this function exists or not but lets assume that there is a designer. Let see if we can agree on that fact that if there is designer then this function exist. Let me know what you think.

 

[seagal]

You don’t need to apologize dude

The function exists if there is a designing otherwise doesn’t exist. You are correct in saying that we cannot prove or disprove that this function exists or not but lets assume that there is a designer. Let see if we can agree on that fact that if there is designer then this function exist. Let me know what you think.

For the sake of argument I’ll agree to that.

BTW, I’m not a dude

 

[Bahman]

For the sake of argument I’ll agree to that.

BTW, I’m not a dude

So the act creation by God is either a design or not. In first case the function exists and in second case it does not. In first case we cannot accommodate free will within creation and in the second case God can not know what creation is in another word how it functions, hence the act creation seems to be problematic since we have do deal with a statement like “God could create something he does not know”.

 

[seagal]

So the act creation by God is either a design or not. In first case the function exists and in second case it does not. In first case we cannot accommodate free will within creation and in the second case God can not know what creation is in another word how it functions, hence the act creation seems to be problematic since we have do deal with a statement like “God could create something he does not know”.

You’ll need to justify this assumption. In your OP you said “* Functional definability is crucial for an intelligent design since one should know what is the outcome of a design in advance*.” I agree that God, as designer, necessarily knows what the design is and, given his omniscience, knows what the outcome will be . Neither of those statements negates free will. We can individually choose to cooperate or not, either way we are still part of the design.

 

[Bahman]

You’ll need to justify this assumption. In your OP you said “* Functional definability is crucial for an intelligent design since one should know what is the outcome of a design in advance*.” I agree that God, as designer, necessarily knows what the design is and, given his omniscience, knows what the outcome will be . Neither of those statements negates free will. We can individually choose to cooperate or not, either way we are still part of the design.

The last part come from functional definability. You agree that our actions from God point of view are defined in term of circumstances and a function, meaning that given circumstances there is one unique outcome which solely depend on how function is defined. Hence from God point of view we work as a machine, give (name removed by moderator)ut and take output and there is not liberty left for us as we are sole machine hence we have no free will since they are against free will.

This condition however applies to whole creation meaning that the whole has no free will and its outcome is known to God but we can minimalistically grant freedom to individuals within creation with the price that God cannot be aware of decision made with each individual. That of course put a strong constrain on what God knows and what creation is meaning that God cannot have micro-knowledge and cannot make micro-design.

 

[seagal]

The last part come from functional definability. You agree that our actions from God point of view are defined in term of circumstances and a function, meaning that given circumstances there is one unique outcome which solely depend on how function is defined. Hence from God point of view we work as a machine, give (name removed by moderator)ut and take output and there is not liberty left for us as we are sole machine hence we have no free will since they are against free will.

This condition however applies to whole creation meaning that the whole has no free will and its outcome is known to God but we can minimalistically grant freedom to individuals within creation with the price that God cannot be aware of decision made with each individual. That of course put a strong constrain on what God knows and what creation is meaning that God cannot have micro-knowledge and cannot make micro-design.

What you’re forgetting is that our having free will is part of the plan. Paragraph 1730 of the CCC says

God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.”

 

[Bahman]

What you’re forgetting is that our having free will is part of the plan. Paragraph 1730 of the CCC says

That is the part of argument, God cannot grant free will to each individual since that requires micro-knowledge and micro-design hence either free will is an intrinsic property of creation when there are individuals within or it is an illusion.

 

[davidv]

That is the part of argument, God cannot grant free will to each individual since that requires micro-knowledge and micro-design hence either free will is an intrinsic property of creation when there are individuals within or it is an illusion.

This is an unproven, and likely, false claim.

 

[Bahman]

This is an unproven, and likely, false claim.

Which part is a false claim?

 

[davidv]

Which part is a false claim?

Bahman:

…God cannot grant free will…

 

[seagal]

That is the part of argument, God cannot grant free will to each individual since that requires micro-knowledge and micro-design.

I’m assuming that means knowledge of and a plan for each individual? Please explain why God could not have micro-knowledge and micro-design.

hence either free will is an intrinsic property of creation when there are individuals within or it is an illusion.

Free will is an intrinsic property of creatures (us).

 

[Bahman]

davidv:
This is already been discussed. God can only grant something which he knows in another word something which is functionally definable. Functionally definable means that given (name removed by moderator)ut to a system God knows what is the outcome of system and free will does not belong to this category since free will is not functionally definable because the circumstances does not define a decision and if it is so there is no free will.

 

[Bahman]

I’m assuming that means knowledge of and a plan for each individual? Please explain why God could not have micro-knowledge and micro-design.

Because you have to extend the previous argument to each individual meaning that if God wants to grant X to individual Y then X has to be functionally definable at least by God. This means that there exists a function which define behavior Y given circumstances meaning that the person cannot be free.

Free will is an intrinsic property of creatures (us).

You are correct. I had to be more precise. So the correct argument is “God cannot grant free will to each individual since that requires micro-knowledge and micro-design hence either free will is an intrinsic property of individuals within creation or it is an illusion.”

 

[seagal]

Because you have to extend the previous argument to each individual meaning that if God wants to grant X to individual Y then X has to be functionally definable at least by God. This means that there exists a function which define behavior Y given circumstances meaning that the person cannot be free.

You’re getting more obtuse. Is X free will? Or something else? You have Y defined as an individual and a behavior. I see nothing here that explains why God can’t grant free will to individuals.

 

[Bahman]

You’re getting more obtuse. Is X free will? Or something else? You have Y defined as an individual and a behavior. I see nothing here that explains why God can’t grant free will to individuals.

Sorry for not being clear. X could be everything that God grant but free will and Y is individual. In another word everything that is functionally definable. Free will is not functionally definable since we believe it does not solely depend on circumstances and there is power of mind which can do things unconditionally.

 

[seagal]

Sorry for not being clear. X could be everything that God grant but free will and Y is individual. In another word everything that is functionally definable. Free will is not functionally definable since we believe it does not solely depend on circumstances and there is power of mind which can do things unconditionally.

I’m sorry, I’m giving up this discussion. I know you’re trying to disprove free will but nothing you’ve said here makes sense to me.