How God could create a being with free will?

[Bahman]

A sphinx isn’t “lion, bird, and human”, it just has parts of all three. That’s not a contradiction.
Also, drinking poision doesn’t break the laws of nature. By laws of nature I thought you meant rules of physics.

If you don’t know what introspection is, it’s your consciousness of yourself (wikipedia could have helped you with that). Introspection is infallible.

I am aware of my consciousness but I don’t have consciousness to my free will.

You need to drop this idea of “T1, then T2”. God is in eternity rather than time, and he created time from eternity. The creation of time is not in a temporal sequence.

Why I need drop it? The creation get through the sequence of time but not God, these two however coexist together. So there is in fact a state at which we have “God and creation only at time T1” and “then infinitesimally latter God and creation only at time T2”. There is noting wrong in this statement. Let me know what is wrong with this statement and we can move from there.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

First, I corrected my argument slightly to show what do I meant. Second, I meant the act of decision making which is a unpredictable act has to be free of law of physics since law of physics are deterministic. We can continue from here if you agree with my current statement.

I agree that the " act of decision " is not burdened by the laws of physics. I think we should avoid attributing adjectives of any kind to the laws of physics.

So, exactly what is the problem you are haveing with understanding how God could create a being with a free will. Are you saying that is contradictory? Are you suggesting that this is not possible for God to do?

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

I agree that the " act of decision " is not burdened by the laws of physics. I think we should avoid attributing adjectives of any kind to the laws of physics.

So, exactly what is the problem you are haveing with understanding how God could create a being with a free will. Are you saying that is contradictory? Are you suggesting that this is not possible for God to do?
Linus2nd

The problem arises from definition of unpredictability of free will. Free will to my understanding is a unpredictable quality from God reference of view as well as our reference of view. Lets see if we could first agree upon this point.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

The problem arises from definition of unpredictability of free will. Free will to my understanding is a unpredictable quality from God reference of view as well as our reference of view. Lets see if we could first agree upon this point.

We do not define phrases. We can define " free will. " We can say that our will is free. We can say that our decision is free. We are not compelled to do one thing rather than another. Our decisions are determined freely by ourselves by weighing the pros and cons for or against doing one thing rather than another.

But God knows what we will do before we do it.

Is that what you mean? Where do you want to go now?

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

You can of course define free will such as: Free will is the ability of agents to make choices. We however cannot define what is the ability in the above sentence and how it could give rise from self when we are dealing with a situation.

But God knows what we will do before we do it.

This is the part that I have problem with it.

First, that is an assumption that cannot be proven.

Second, Lets think of the following statements to see if they could get us somewhere: 1) We could assume that this is God that makes the decision in favour of us in each situation to let us experience different quality of being. 2) We could also say that this is me who decide in a situation but God knows its outcome anyway. Could you please let me know what is the difference between the last statements when it comes the final outcome which experiencing different qualities?

Is that what you mean? Where do you want to go now?
Linus2nd

Where I am going very much depends if we could agree on definition of predictability of free will from God point of view. So lets see if we could agree upon that first.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

You can of course define free will such as: Free will is the ability of agents to make choices. We however cannot define what is the ability in the above sentence and how it could give rise from self when we are dealing with a situation

God has given us the power or ability when he created us. It is a power of our nature to learn and come to knowledge and to make decisions based on what we know.

This is the part that I have problem with it.

The God we believe in is perfect in every way. If there were something he did not know, he would not be God.

First, that is an assumption that cannot be proven.

Not empirically of course but we can supply good reasons.

1. The Scriptures. drbo.org/
2. 2,000 years of Catholic Tradition vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
3. Philosophical Reasoning as is found in the Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and other philosophers. newadvent.org/summa/

• Example. The universe exists. It did not nor can it cause itself to exist. Therefore there must exist a perfect being who is responsible for creating everything and this we call God.

: Second, Lets think of the following statements to see if they could get us somewhere: 1) We could assume that this is God that makes the decision in favour of us in each situation to let us experience different quality of being.

Our free choices have nothing to do with God making things turn out in our favor. If we do something he does not approve of we have sinned to a lesser or greater degree. He will not " make things nice for us " because of that. And unless we repent, he will make things decidedly worse! I think you may be confusing punishment or reward due to our acts with the natural gifts he has given us - family, nation, pleasant surroundings, good friends, good health, etc.

God does not want us to exerience every thing possible. What are you driving at.? That was where our First Parents went wrong. They wanted to experience everything. God didn’t want them to do that. So now look where the world is? But we are no better!!!

1. We could also say that this is me who decide in a situation but God knows its outcome anyway. Could you please let me know what is the difference between the last statements when it comes the final outcome which experiencing different qualities?

I can only say that our goal in life is not to experience every thing. It is to do what God wants, to love Him as our Father, and to spend eternity with Him, and to love and help our neighbor. The final " outcome " will depend on how well we conform our will to his.

Where I am going very much depends if we could agree on definition of predictability of free will from God point of view. So lets see if we could agree upon that first.

You can define " predictability " and you can define " free will, " you cannot define " predictability of free will. " You may say that God can know what we will choose or not. I say that he knows ahead of time what we will do. But he will not prevent us from doing anything we decide to do, in most situations. He may prevent us from doing some things but will still punish us for our bad will.

Linus2nd

 

[SentinelofTruth]

Bahman:

I am aware of my consciousness but I don’t have consciousness to my free will.

If you think you don’t perceive yourself to have free will then you misunderstand what I mean. You know how perception is kind of like a background process? When you perceive yourself to be having a certain thought, you are all the while aware that you have this thought, yet you are not necessarily thinking about that you have it. The perception of freedom of choice feels just the same way: like a background process. You are always aware that you are perceiving it, but not always thinking about it. This correspondence between the perception of free will and perception through introspection gives us grounds for believing that our perception of free will is indeed through introspection, in which case we cannot rationally deny it.

 

[Bahman]

God has given us the power or ability when he created us. It is a power of our nature to learn and come to knowledge and to make decisions based on what we know.

The God we believe in is perfect in every way. If there were something he did not know, he would not be God.

Not empirically of course but we can supply good reasons.

1. The Scriptures. drbo.org/
2. 2,000 years of Catholic Tradition vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
3. Philosophical Reasoning as is found in the Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and other philosophers. newadvent.org/summa/

• Example. The universe exists. It did not nor can it cause itself to exist. Therefore there must exist a perfect being who is responsible for creating everything and this we call God.

Our free choices have nothing to do with God making things turn out in our favor. If we do something he does not approve of we have sinned to a lesser or greater degree. He will not " make things nice for us " because of that. And unless we repent, he will make things decidedly worse! I think you may be confusing punishment or reward due to our acts with the natural gifts he has given us - family, nation, pleasant surroundings, good friends, good health, etc.

God does not want us to exerience every thing possible. What are you driving at.? That was where our First Parents went wrong. They wanted to experience everything. God didn’t want them to do that. So now look where the world is? But we are no better!!!

I can only say that our goal in life is not to experience every thing. It is to do what God wants, to love Him as our Father, and to spend eternity with Him, and to love and help our neighbor. The final " outcome " will depend on how well we conform our will to his.

You can define " predictability " and you can define " free will, " you cannot define " predictability of free will. " You may say that God can know what we will choose or not. I say that he knows ahead of time what we will do. But he will not prevent us from doing anything we decide to do, in most situations. He may prevent us from doing some things but will still punish us for our bad will.

Linus2nd

Thank you very much for your long post.

Well it seems we have to choose another road to conclude something.

Do you believe that free will is intrinsically unpredictable at least from our reference of view? By intrinsically I mean that you cannot find a set of laws at which they help you to understand the outcome of your decision in a situation (this we agreed upon: that free will is free of law of physics). I am sure that your answer to this question is yes. Now my question from you is that how an unpredictable quality from our reference of view could look predictable from God reference of view?, knowing the fact that the free will does not obeys any laws of nature. My question is that how does God know all our decisions if free will is an unpredictable quality? My other question is what is the point of creation if its outcome is already known? My last question is that why we should be responsible for something that is unpredictable to us?

 

[Bahman]

If you think you don’t perceive yourself to have free will then you misunderstand what I mean. You know how perception is kind of like a background process? When you perceive yourself to be having a certain thought, you are all the while aware that you have this thought, yet you are not necessarily thinking about that you have it. The perception of freedom of choice feels just the same way: like a background process. You are always aware that you are perceiving it, but not always thinking about it. This correspondence between the perception of free will and perception through introspection gives us grounds for believing that our perception of free will is indeed through introspection, in which case we cannot rationally deny it.

Could you please elaborate? Give me one example.

 

[SentinelofTruth]

Bahman:

Could you please elaborate? Give me one example.

An example of what?

 

[Bahman]

An example of what?

An example, a thought experiment that by using that I could find that I have free will.

 

[SentinelofTruth]

Bahman:

An example, a thought experiment that by using that I could find that I have free will.

Calling that an example is a little confusing, but very well.
Through introspection (your perception of your conscious self*), you perceive your choices to be free.
Besides being absurd, the idea of introspection being fallible seems to be a contradiction in terms: if X is a part of your conscious mind, then by definition you must be conscious of it. You couldn’t not be conscious of something your conscious mind is doing, nor could you be conscious of something it isn’t doing as something it is doing**.
Since it seems impossible to defend the fallibility of introspection, we must agree to whatever it says, among which is that we have free will

• to clarify something here, “perception of” does simply mean “whatever you believe about”.
  There is a unique feel to perception. When you have a perception, such as seeing something, you are certainly all the while aware of the perception, but it’s sort of like a backgrund process in the way that you’re not necessarily thinking about it. This “consciousness of, but not attention to” is what marks something as a perception. So, for instance, your introspection does not tell you that you don’t have free will, because that’s not a perception. That’s a belief.
  **This sentence may be a bit confusing (no offence, it’s just that most of the people I’ve talked to here don’t seem able to understand complex sentences). This just means that if your conscious mind is not doing X, you couldn’t be conscious of it doing X.