If God is Omniscient then Human is not free.

Discussion in 'Serious Discussion' started by sid_16, Apr 9, 2013.

?

Free will doesn't exist If God is omniscient.

  1. If yes, why?

    33 vote(s)
    46.5%
  2. If no, then how?

    38 vote(s)
    53.5%
  1. R29k

    R29k MDL GLaDOS

    Feb 13, 2011
    4,893
    4,491
    150
    @case-sensitive you have mangled what I said beyond recognition.
    All I'm sayingv simply, you live in a democratic system that is being misused by the voters and parties alike. The power has always been with the voters. Yes policy and outcomes can be and have been influenced by the rich et al. However this blame solely lies with the voting population, for not seeing beyond the fluff.
    Also don't separate the two classes of society, they are ultimately all humans with the same flaws etc.
    @gorski there is a solution 1) have stricter rules governing people running for public office., Let them actually be qualified to run 2) Ban ad campaigns and let them do their campaigning by debates etc we all know the unwashed masses are easily influenced by ads. 3) stop mixing news on social media platforms.
     
  2. gorski

    gorski MDL Guru

    Oct 21, 2009
    3,864
    1,023
    120
    It's not that simple... You can not just wish away the very core of this society! Societal structures are present and people are divided, quite strictly! Main difference - wealth, money, amassed stuff, Rigid divisions, from education onward! And that will determine the outcomes in one's life very rigidly and strictly! But not only class!

    Ask black people jogging in well-off neighbourhoods or even rich black people taking lots of their own cash from a bank, which reports them to the police having given them their money, then they are immediately rushed to the ground, handcuffed, laughed at.... by the cops! Need I go on to huge amounts of killings by cops of unarmed black people etc.?

    Of course, there are other divisions - ideological, world-view, party political, school of thought, religious etc. But for the USAofA these are the most obvious, undeniable ones to immediately jump to one's mind...

    I wish I could live in a transparent society, I really do, alas....
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  3. R29k

    R29k MDL GLaDOS

    Feb 13, 2011
    4,893
    4,491
    150
    The divisions are irrelevant, the reasons are relevant! It's the evolutionary response of reciprocal altruism and simple survival. I really wish people would see things for what they are as opposed what they think they are really. When are you going to admit that I'm right about humans @gorski
     
  4. gorski

    gorski MDL Guru

    Oct 21, 2009
    3,864
    1,023
    120
    That is an enormous simplification without any evidence that such a reductionism is in any way actually functional for ALL!!!!
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  5. case-sensitive

    case-sensitive MDL Senior Member

    Nov 7, 2013
    399
    148
    10
    #2225 case-sensitive, Jun 17, 2020
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2020
    Instead of announcing to the world that your right and trying to blind me with big words ........ Try making points and answering to points ?

    >you live in a democratic system

    If you want to play semantics ...... There are no democratic systems / countrys in the world . No countrys with free elections . Where can i vote for WHAT i want ? ....... instead of being ' allowed ' to vote for people that have lead us into disaster ? Is there a climate catastrophy ? Yes or no . WHO lead us into it ? ...... and who isnt leading us out of it ? Did you vote for the climate catastrophy ? Did anyone ? Were WE given a choice ? Did it just happen ? Was it the daleks ? The borg ? OR the people that proclaim themselves to be our leaders ?

    >you live in a democratic system that is being misused by the voters and parties alike

    How do the voters abuse the / their democratic system ? By refusing to take part ? Why dont they take part ? Look at how many people in little britain or germoney are allowed to vote . Then at how many actualy do vote . And then at the number that voted for the ' winners ' ....,.... how many % was that ? ............ and then look at how many of the people that did colaberate that DIDNT vote for the ' winners ' . Is that democracy ? Rule by the people ? For the people by the people ?

    >Yes policy and outcomes can be and have been influenced by the rich et al

    Can you afford a lobbyist ? A massive publicity campaign ? Do the poor own the press ? Does it represent their values ? Did you watch CNN ? and the continual adverts for rolex watches and high tech yachts ? Is that for the poor ? Did you notice that the people that profit from the stock market are the rich ? ....... playing / gambling with other peoples money ? Who lost in the bank crash ? Who caused it ? Who payed twice for it ? And who profits from it ?

    At democratic change . ......... who fought for and got votes for women ? Political partys or women ? Who fought for equal rights for LGBTQ people ? Political partys or LGBTQ people ? Who fougjht for over 200 years to free the US slaves and stop racism ? The governments or the people ? ......... Did you notice pelosi and the ' democratic ' SCUM kneeling and talking about reform ? ......... wich they didnt do for about 200 years ! And are now only doing it to get the cash ?

    Whos in prison in the unuk and amlland ? White honkys ? The criminaly rich ? Or masses of black , brown , mexican people ?

    At undenyable proof ---- > Look at the tax laws in the west . Clearly made for the rich by the rich . Can you afford to hide money in tax havens ? What happens when the criminaly rich get caught dodging taxes ? Do they go to prison ? Are their lives ruined like poor peoples lives are ruined ? ...... Or do they betray the british people by dodging taxes and live in f**kingthem palace ?

    If i cant afford a solicitor as the most cant ......... have i realy got any legal rights ? ....... except on paper ?

    IF you understand that then look at the drug laws in the world with the same eyes as looking at the tax laws ........ = Same same . Rich people deciding that their killer products are ' legal ' and other peoples products are drugs , dangerous and illegal . Tobaco and alcohol are the two worst drugs that there are and the dealers are not punished ........ inspite of the millions of deaths , addictions , ruined lives .

    Remember pablo escobar and kun sa ? ....... The mexican , thai and and italian mafia ? .......... and how many BILLIONS of $ they made ....... the dead addicts ...... the crimes commited by junkys to get cash for drugs .

    ALL of that was made possible by ' democratic ' governments ......... whos laws split society into ' Good ' and bad drug users ....... and kept the prices high ....... and the quality low ........ and refused help and treatement for the victims ........ and instead criminalised them , did witch hunts against them , executed them , bombed them , locked them up in comercial prisons = criminal universitys where they meet real criminals and learn to hate society and government .

    Remeber two opium wars ? Where the rich westerners , capitalists forced the chinese to buy opium .

    Hey wow !!! Cool ! .......... WE had a choice ? Or was it inflicted on us ?

    At EVIL questions ---- > We live in a capitalist system ? ............. Are you a capitalist ? :) ....... Then what are you ? :) ....... A tenant ? A lodger ? A slave ?

    >However this blame solely lies with the voting population, for not seeing beyond the fluff.

    Its their own fault !!!! ...... because they havent had an education where they learn to see and deal with the ' fluff' ? ....... and thats their fault ?

    >Also don't separate the two classes of society, they are ultimately all humans with the same flaws etc.

    Hitler was also a human being , his kids loved him and he had friends ....... did he have the same flaws as you ? Your friends ?

    >I really wish people would see things for what they are as opposed what they think they are really.

    Aha !! :) ...... YOU see things as they REALY are and the rest dont ? ....... Your right becaus your right and that proves that your right .

    The poor are poor becaus they are lazy ? .......... and they can change things by voting ? ......... how many thousand years have and will the rich keep chanting those lies / propoganda ? Did the poor choose to be poor ? Did they vote for it ? Do they need to be poor ?

    IF we live in a democracy why dont we have equal pay for women ? A minimum wage ? An end to racism ? TODAY ? NOW ? Why dont they just go into parlament NOW and vote for it ? Would it take longer than a few minutes ?

    Have you ever been hungry ? Homeless ? Do you know what poverty is ? I do . I also know what its like to be able to buy what i want when i want ......... Three days with nothing to eat , dressed in rags begging for food not cash and to weak to walk ......... and other times with 1000 $ a day pocket money . I see the difference .

    Talk is talk . Propoganda proganda ......... and change is change . Where is and was that change ? For who ?

    But theres no difference ....... its all the way we look at it .
     
  6. gorski

    gorski MDL Guru

    Oct 21, 2009
    3,864
    1,023
    120
    It's even more complex, I'm afraid... You see, you might wanna leave the "women's rights" alone, 'cause...

    There is no easy way to say it, so: rather than Liberals, in the UK women were ushered into political life by Tories/Conservatives. No, it is not that simple, conservatives better hold on to their hats, not yet time to triumph... They did not do that because they figured out the error of their "traditional" ways (they were the real oppressors of women, "traditionally" - so, why give them their rights now?) - but because they calculated that it will be women who will vote for them and keep them in power for a long time, with the new votes... And they did! They saw women as traditionally "conservative", the bearers of "tradition", customs, language etc. through their traditional roles at home etc. It gets ever more complicated, as you continue following this strange saga but this is enough, I think....

    Before that, it wasn't the Serfs who brought down the Feudal Lords. Oh, no, it was the emerging Bourgeoisie and Proletariat, actually. There are studies showing that Serfs could not have been stopped by the Feudal Lords, had they went all out for it but... The role of religion and no education etc. were instrumental in inculcating into them the "give onto Emperor his own" value/commandment...

    Before that, it wasn't Slaves who brought down Slavery. Oh, no, it was the Barbarians, coming from the "outside" of what we know as epoch of Slavery...

    So, Humans are not exactly "rational". Quite the opposite, especially in politics, we are frequently quite irrational...

    And it has nothing to do with God, of course. We do have free will and therefore freedom to exercise it!!!

    We have proven it way too many times even for a heavy duty Conservative with brains to try to deny it...

    But the road to it is always long and winding for many a reason...
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  7. case-sensitive

    case-sensitive MDL Senior Member

    Nov 7, 2013
    399
    148
    10
    #2227 case-sensitive, Jun 23, 2020
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2020
    Not argueing ...... just for fun ---- >

    >They did not do that because they figured out the error of their "traditional" ways (they were the real oppressors of women, "traditionally" - so, why give them their rights now?) - but because they calculated that it will be women who will vote for them and keep them in power for a long time, with the new votes... And they did!

    Hmmmm .... :) ...... They were given the right to vote by polytrickers ...... men ...... for the advantage of men ...... because those men had no choice ? ...... because women stood up and fought ...... from words and demonstrations ...... to jumping in front of the kings horse ........ to emmilie pankhurst ......... to bomb and fire attacks .........which put the rights of women into the public domane to an extent that the men polytrickers couldnt ignore it anymore ......... What to do ? Either keep them down ........ and the woman get more militant ...... or try to buy them by giving them the right to vote .

    OK they got the right to vote ...... but they didnt and still havent got equal rights = The polytrickers dont realy give a fiddlers toss about them and just wanted to bribe them for their own ends ..... to get votes .

    Three different ways of seeing it = What you've sáid , what i learned in school and what wikipaedia says . The history we learn was dictated by the rich ...... men ...... to their advantage . The winners write history . The whole of the history we learn in schools is just a record of the continuation of the missuse of power by rich men ........ = the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisie

    serfs = Working class = slaves = proletariat

    bourgeoisie = middle / upperclass = feudal lords = the rich = polytrickers

    >it wasn't the Serfs who brought down the Feudal Lords.

    The situation hasnt changed except that the serfs have on paper some legal rights ....... wich in practice they dont get because they cant afford to pay for solicitors and court cases . Whats the point of rights on paper that in reality arent there ?

    Freeing the slaves ? Nope . Slavery is bonded labor = People in a position where they cant realy do anything , change anything ....... and are forced to work ...... exactly as the working classes now . Whats the difference between a physical slave and a financial slave ?

    Slavery didnt end . The slaves werent freed . The owners used to have to house , clothe and feed their slaves ....... and they were kept down by police , courts and armys . That costed money .

    Slavery is not just being a prisoner that has to work . Its also a matter of money . All the slave owners did was to ' free ' the slaves = They then had to look after themselves , feed themselves , clothe themselves ....... from their ' wages ' wich wasnt and still isnt enough cash to actualy house , feed , clothe them or allow them to get their rights through law . Just throw them on the streets and tell them that they are free ...... and then just exploit them and abuse them ...... as before .

    What has that got to do with free will ? ....... We have free will !!! ? ...... Do slaves have free will ?
     
  8. gorski

    gorski MDL Guru

    Oct 21, 2009
    3,864
    1,023
    120
    Oh, dear... I can't, really, no time, must tend to family's needs - study Aristotle: slaves = talking tools. Bonded labour doesn't begin covering it...

    And so on...
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  9. case-sensitive

    case-sensitive MDL Senior Member

    Nov 7, 2013
    399
    148
    10
    :) ...... Did it 50 years ago ........ to primitive for me ........ I'm more into real life philosophy than talking and speculating about self evident truths ...... Either way ...... only two choices = Either a person does what they want or what someone else wants ...... and yes as we see today most people want to be told what to do and have someone take their responsibility for them . Most people would say thanks if someone s**t in their mouths = Happy slaves .

    If you want me to understand something please explain it yourself . Pointing me at aristotle and expecting me to see what you want how you want is about the same as me pointing you at wikipaedia and telling you to read it :)
     
  10. gorski

    gorski MDL Guru

    Oct 21, 2009
    3,864
    1,023
    120
    You're repeating Aristotle but badly, actually.... inventing warm water, as it were... but suit yourself... ;)
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  11. case-sensitive

    case-sensitive MDL Senior Member

    Nov 7, 2013
    399
    148
    10
    Yes :) ...... because its self evident ...... and i didnt need more than a few words ....... and i didnt need to go to university or study for years or quote someone else .

    Your signature says the same ...... but typical for ' philosophy ' ...... = why say something in a few words when one can play pseudo interllectual semantic games and ...... like a lot of modern philosophy ...... talk and speculate about irelevant things in never ending circles .

    AND ....... Doesnt that signature and what your saying about aristotle fit to me :) ?


    I think ....... if a person needs / wants to read books for knowledge its better to read them ...... pick out the truthes ...... and forget the rest .......

    Why dont people ...... everyday people .......who need those truthes ...... read aristotle and other philosophers ? ...... Because it boring and extra long winded ...... plus its translations that often loose or make their ...... simple selfevident truthes harder to see .
     
  12. case-sensitive

    case-sensitive MDL Senior Member

    Nov 7, 2013
    399
    148
    10
    Gorski I reread my last post and now see that it could be missenterpreted as shooting at you . I apologise . It wasnt suposed to be that . I did say ' Just for fun ' as i like debating and friendly verbal fencing :) For me what i said and say is about politics , society and philosophy . I didnt want to diss you . I'm sorry if it came over that way . ...... in end effect we are often saying the same thing and i like the position you take about politics and society .
     
  13. R29k

    R29k MDL GLaDOS

    Feb 13, 2011
    4,893
    4,491
    150
    If human is omniscient then god is not free?
     
  14. haz367

    haz367 MDL Member

    Jan 11, 2020
    157
    142
    10
    hehe...

    [​IMG]

    Great discussion btw :)
     
  15. tijybba

    tijybba MDL Novice

    Apr 6, 2012
    10
    2
    0
    If there is no God, then both options stands invalid . This leads to existence of Free will or its illusion.Though limited on its own terms.

    If there is God , then by biological programming , we are more prone or tend to believe he is omniscient. But that would be fooling us to observe Free will , even if it's not in our short lifespans.

    Free will in its essence means to choose to do with the power/life given/blessed to you , not talking in materialistic or superheroic terms. But the power of your conscience or Biological existence .To always choose to do the best that our kind can possibly do with all of its Intelligence and exploration .Although not perfectly as we can't control our minds or thoughts or creativity .

    For instance , By our limited imagination and evolution , if we are able to create intelligence or life or any of the Beautiful creation we observe in universe .
    We will put limits to its functionality for the sole purpose it was created .Even by giving it more power than granted to us by universal resources and not giving it everything we know ,and evetually distancing it to not overpower us for our survival . Somehow Similar to corporate structure , to have limited powers down the pyramid .


    So we are allowing Free will to exists to our creations but also believing that limits will play their parts .

    So Free will does exists , to our existential limitations , even if God is omniscient or not . It does not matter .

    If we do say that God is not omniscient , then we are underestimating his/her's/its power to do so .It would be stupidity from our end.


    P.s.-- Although its an old thread , added few words to satisfy my need to answer it .
     
  16. LiteOS

    LiteOS MDL Expert

    Mar 7, 2014
    1,768
    754
    60
    god is infinite in any level
    but choose to not interfere with free will
    he didnt want to market himself or add "Term of use" to his gift of life
    or register / login [ religion ] to use :D
     
  17. antiCMOS

    antiCMOS MDL Novice

    Sep 7, 2020
    27
    9
    0
    If this is really a serious discussion/question, then IMO it needs to be asked in a scientific manner. It would be helpfull to state definitions initially. To me, "will", implies a choice, or determination. Do you use "will" as a verb? A Noun? If you use, "will", as a verb then I think it s illogical, because I believe a verb is an expression of an act, (that would necessarly demand that the expression be performed by someone/something.) If you use, "will", as a noun then it s something completely different. Context is also helpfull. 112 pages of opinion is probably an interesting read, and I was prepared to give it a go, but have since decided it s just lesson in futility, because few are on the same page. IMO the initial question was not presented correctly.
     
  18. gorski

    gorski MDL Guru

    Oct 21, 2009
    3,864
    1,023
    120
    There is this possibility called "philosophy", too.... Not just either dogmatic belief or scientific mumbling on the subject...

    In fact this is primarily a philosophical question and it can only be thought through properly as such... ;)
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  19. antiCMOS

    antiCMOS MDL Novice

    Sep 7, 2020
    27
    9
    0
    Though I imagine you would agree that datums must be set never-the-less. Defining arguments, and elements of arguments is universal; even in philosophy. Just because the answer is un atainable does not give licence to say anything in any way.
     
  20. gorski

    gorski MDL Guru

    Oct 21, 2009
    3,864
    1,023
    120
    You really have no clue what you are talking about - sorry but it has to be said...
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...