Spock, it is obvious that you are having trouble with reading and thinking, so let me see if I can make this a little simpler despite how obvious it is to some of us already.
You are confusing what “free-will” actually means. You are talking about “uncaused choice” or free from reality itself. This was never what “free-will” actually meant in any Scripture anywhere, but since you have it stuck in your head, we’ll take it from there.
You begin your argument with the statement;
“1) Let’s start with a very simple world, where there is one moral agent, who makes one decision.”
In this case, the one “moral agent” must make a “moral decision”. A moral decision is NOT a “uncaused choice” (or what you are calling free-will). A moral decision is bound, that is what makes it moral and dependable.
So this first decision is un-free.
Then you state;
“… In that case there are two possible worlds,…”
Huh? No, where did you get 2 possible worlds already? You had one world with a moral agent who is bound in his will to be moral and thus not free to do anything but make the one moral decision. There is no “2 possible worlds”.
That was error #2 – (the first being the afore mentioned premise flaw)
“…and another one, where the agent makes an immoral choice.”
Again, this agent is already defined as a moral agent and thus cannot make this “immoral decision” you mention.
That was error #3
“…God can actualize either one of these worlds.”
Well, not really as pointed out in both the premise error that we are forgiving due to your apparent mental state, but also in that there was only one possibility even accepting your prior error.
That was error #4 – led to by error #3
“…Therefore there is one world with free will and no evil evil choices.”
No, it was not a world with free-will in your example because the agent was NOT free to be immoral.
That was error #5
All of that was just in your first step (1). But you go on;
“2) Now let’s consider a world, with one moral agent, who makes many decisions. Let the number of decisions be “N”. In this case there are “N + 1” possible worlds, where the agent makes exactly 0, 1, 2, etc… all the way up to N morally upright decisons.”
No. You contradict yourself. You say “a world” but then you say, “N+1 possible worlds”. ”. At most you have specified 2 worlds, each bound by morals behavior, not free-will.
That was error #6
“3) The next possible scenario is when there are “M” moral agents in the world, and each of them makes exactly one decision. In this case there are “M + 1” possible worlds…”
No, Again, you contradict yourself. You say “the world” and then you say, “M+1 possible worlds”.
That was error #7
“…In this world we also have free will, no coersion, and no immoral choices.”
No. You specified the one condition of “moral agents” and thus NO immoral choices and thus in this example there is NOT any other options and thus no free-will to do otherwise.
That was error #8
“4) The final possible scenario is where there are “N” moral agents, and each of them makes “M” decisons. Both “N” and “M” can be any arbitrary number, so this scenario precisely reflects our current world.”
No. You have stated that our current world is one in which ALL agents are moral. This is another false assertion or premise if you prefer.
That was error #9
“…Since each agent makes “M” decisions, the number of possible worlds is "(N + 1)(M + 1)".”*
No. You have specified only 4 worlds each with only morally bound, unfree, agents.
That was error #10
“Of these possible worlds there is one where each agent makes only moral decisions. In all the other ones at least one agent makes at least one immoral decision.”
No. In each of your specified worlds, every agent was moral and thus bound and NOT free to make any immoral decisions.
That was error #11
“God can also instantiate or actualize any one of these worlds, since none of them contains a logical contradiction.”
No. ALL of them contain logical contradictions.
That was error #12
“Result: No matter how many moral agents are in a world, and no matter how many decisions are made, there is at least one possible world where all the agents make only morally upright decisions - while retaining their free will.”
No. At no time were ANY of your proposed agents free. They were ALL bound by moral behavior.
That was error #13
“God can actualize this world since it contains no logical contradiction.”
No. This is just a repeat of error #13
That was error #14
“This is a mathematical proof.”
No. It had nothing to do with mathematics other than you mentioning some variables, a plus sign, and a “1”. No mathematics was involved. It was merely a very poor attempt at a “logical argument” that used some variables and a plus sign.
That was error #15
“It shows that the existence of free will does not logically lead to immoral decisions”
No. It said NOTHING about free-will choices as each and every of your agents were moral and thus bound and not free.
That was error #16
Spock, you didn’t even have 16 sentences. This is why I dislike evaluating proposed logical arguments by those who can’t even get their premises right.
You proved nothing but how little you think before you presume and quickly frustrate yourself while blaming others.
), chosen by God. Etc. QED.
