So, who is responsible?

[John21652]

Apologists assert that God gave us free will, and therefore God is not responsible for our free actions. As usual, they stay on the surface of the question, and this proposition sounds plausible. Of course it is totally wrong. One example will prove that they are wrong.

Suppose you have a psychopath in your custody. You know that this person has already committed some serious atrocities (murders, rapes, etc…). You also know that this person will commit more atrocities, if given half a chance. (Omniscience) You have the option to release him or not. (Creating that person) If you release him knowing full well what he will do, then you cannot “hide” behind the defense that you, personally did not do those acts, he did them out of his own volition, and you just wash your hands Pilate-style.

All his acts are the result of you opening his prison cell and setting him free. You are responsible for what he did. Can you deny it?

From here -

“…psychopaths have sufficient cognitive ability to know that their anti-social behaviour is morally reprehensible and sufficient volitional controls to inhibit their anti-social behaviour…”

As well as not creating this person, the one who releases him can never have perfect knowledge about his future behaviour.

 

[david_friol_1]

Apologists assert that God gave us free will, and therefore God is not responsible for our free actions. As usual, they stay on the surface of the question, and this proposition sounds plausible. Of course it is totally wrong. One example will prove that they are wrong.

Suppose you have a psychopath in your custody. You know that this person has already committed some serious atrocities (murders, rapes, etc…). You also know that this person will commit more atrocities, if given half a chance. (Omniscience) You have the option to release him or not. (Creating that person) If you release him knowing full well what he will do, then you cannot “hide” behind the defense that you, personally did not do those acts, he did them out of his own volition, and you just wash your hands Pilate-style.

All his acts are the result of you opening his prison cell and setting him free. You are responsible for what he did. Can you deny it?

Hey Spock
-Omniscience- Is knowing all things not just knowing that one thing- just to clarify
-Suspecting that someone may do something based on past events is not really “knowing” that the will or will not do something in the future- Many have surprised me when they did not do as I believed they would
-Usually psychopaths are not in the custody of the individual but in the care of the state and their determination of whether he/she goes free is based on their study of behavior, both in general and of the individual psychopath.
-If he/she is set free based on the doctors judgement and then goes out and does the very thing we all would not want, there may be subjective pains and feelings of responsibility but they are not objective because the doctors job is in no regard a guarantee of prevention of future harmful choices of a patient but merely his assessment of the patients present condition with considerations of past patient activity.
So in answer to your question:Can you deny it? I would say yes, I believe we could deny it!
God bless you and your family!

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Can you deny it?

Easily.

To an omniscient being all knowledge is necessarily “now”. To an omnipresent being all places are necessarily “here”. Therefore all events happen in an Omni-Beings eternal “here and now”. Which would necessarily include both your free will act and the act of your creation.

Your analogy presumes that an Omni-Beings perception of time and space is sequential. That presumption contradicts the definition of the Omni Attributes.

 

[Spock]

Hey Spock
-Omniscience- Is knowing all things not just knowing that one thing- just to clarify
-Suspecting that someone may do something based on past events is not really “knowing” that the will or will not do something in the future- Many have surprised me when they did not do as I believed they would
-Usually psychopaths are not in the custody of the individual but in the care of the state and their determination of whether he/she goes free is based on their study of behavior, both in general and of the individual psychopath.
-If he/she is set free based on the doctors judgement and then goes out and does the very thing we all would not want, there may be subjective pains and feelings of responsibility but they are not objective because the doctors job is in no regard a guarantee of prevention of future harmful choices of a patient but merely his assessment of the patients present condition with considerations of past patient activity.
So in answer to your question:Can you deny it? I would say yes, I believe we could deny it!

You redefined the the thought experiment.

I know what the difference is between a reasonable assumption that something will happen and really foreseeing that something will happen.

I know that usually sociopaths and psychpaths are not in individual custody. Not relevant.

It said “IF you have foreknowledge", THEN…”. Since your answer answer did not cover what I actually asked, I will have to disregard it. Sorry.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

It said “IF you have foreknowledge", THEN…”.

You might as well be saying “IF you have a Unicorn Ranch, THEN…”

By definition an Omni-Being cannot have “foreknowledge”.

 

[david_friol_1]

You redefined the the thought experiment.

I know what the difference is between a reasonable assumption that something will happen and really foreseeing that something will happen.

I know that usually sociopaths and psychpaths are not in individual custody. Not relevant.

It said “IF you have foreknowledge", THEN…”. Since your answer answer did not cover what I actually asked, I will have to disregard it. Sorry.

Hey Spock
Your question is branching off into the unknown for us. Because no one has any experience with such things I answered you the best I can with the experience and understanding that I have I the actual world we live in. Perhaps your example could be reworked in a way that does not involve me using my imagination in an area where I have absolutely no experience; IOW something that does not require me to say what I would or would not do if I had the Qualities that are usually associated with what we call God.

God bless you and draw you to himself!

 

[warpspeedpetey]

You might as well be saying “IF you have a Unicorn Ranch, THEN…”

By definition an Omni-Being cannot have “foreknowledge”. Because all knowledge is immediate to an Omni-Being.