The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Religion » The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom » The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom

The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom
An analysis of William Lane Craig's book

Page: 1 2

The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom

kNoctis
Threading

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
Total Topics: 61
Total Posts: 506

Posted 06/07/06 - 10:54 PM: Subject: The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom	#1
I did this awhile ago with Plato's Crito on the Ethics board. A couple of people found it informative and I enjoyed it, so I am going to do the same with Craig's book, "The Only Wise God: The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom". This in depth analysis will consist of a thesis and outline, a list of Craig's central arguments, an in depth analysis and evaluation of 2 or 3 of Craig's arguments, an abstract and analysis of one scholarly article written on the relationship between divine foreknowledge and human freedom, and finally an argumentative paper. I plan to have the outline up in a day or two.

Andrew Saunders
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 08, 2004
Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 947

Posted 06/07/06 - 11:33 PM:	#2
Dru DP wrote: I did this awhile ago with Plato's Crito on the Ethics board. A couple of people found it informative and I enjoyed it, so I am going to do the same with Craig's book, "The Only Wise God: The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom". This in depth analysis will consist of a thesis and outline, a list of Craig's central arguments, an in depth analysis and evaluation of 2 or 3 of Craig's arguments, an abstract and analysis of one scholarly article written on the relationship between divine foreknowledge and human freedom, and finally an argumentative paper. I plan to have the outline up in a day or two. How is this a different question than the relationship between free will and determinism (aside from the obvious fact that you dont get people pretending to understand quantum mechanics, and suggesting that quantum indeterminacy = free will)?

kNoctis
Threading

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
Total Topics: 61
Total Posts: 506

Posted 06/08/06 - 08:35 AM:	#3
Well for one, free will and determinism are opposed by definition. Foreknowledge deals more with fatalism - the idea that what will happen must necessarily happen. If it's true that I will eat breakfast in 5 minutes, then I must eat breakfast in 5 minutes. Fatalism doesn't necessarily hold that all our choices are determined by prior causes. A fatalist could hold that our choices are undetermined by prior causes, and yet we still have no power to do anything other than what we are going to do. It doesn't appeal to causal factors to limit human freedom as determinism does. Instead fatalism appeals to the principle that because we are going to do some action, we therefore must do that action.

Andrew Saunders
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 08, 2004
Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 947

Posted 06/08/06 - 11:59 AM:	#4
Dru DP wrote: Well for one, free will and determinism are opposed by definition. Foreknowledge deals more with fatalism - the idea that what will happen must necessarily happen. If it's true that I will eat breakfast in 5 minutes, then I must eat breakfast in 5 minutes. Fatalism doesn't necessarily hold that all our choices are determined by prior causes. A fatalist could hold that our choices are undetermined by prior causes, and yet we still have no power to do anything other than what we are going to do. It doesn't appeal to causal factors to limit human freedom as determinism does. Instead fatalism appeals to the principle that because we are going to do some action, we therefore must do that action. in other words, fatalism says that our actions are determined, prior to them happening. I still don't see a difference. And in response to your initial assertion that free will and determinism are opposed by definition, this is most assuredly not the case, unless one defines free will to mean "the ability to do otherwise" (an arguably naieve and misguided definition.) If however this is your definition of free will, then there is most certainly no distinction between determinism and the above described fatalism, since in neither scenario can an actor "do otherwise".

kNoctis
Threading

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
Total Topics: 61
Total Posts: 506

Posted 06/08/06 - 02:41 PM:	#5
Andrew Saunders wrote: in other words, fatalism says that our actions are determined, prior to them happening. I still don't see a difference. The difference is the reason for that determination. In determinism, actions are determined by prior causes. Those prior causes entail specific actions to come. Free will is nullified because our actions are determined by those prior causes. In fatalism, actions are determined not because of prior causes, but because of true future tense statements. If it is true that I am going to log off of philosophy forums in 10 minutes. Then according to fatalism, I MUST log off of philosophy forums in ten minutes. If I don't, then it was never a true statement to begin with. I suppose I would agree that free will and determinism are not opposed by definition, although they appear to be prima facie opposed

Andrew Saunders
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 08, 2004
Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 947

Posted 06/08/06 - 03:56 PM:	#6
Dru DP wrote: The difference is the reason for that determination. In determinism, actions are determined by prior causes. Those prior causes entail specific actions to come. Free will is nullified because our actions are determined by those prior causes. In fatalism, actions are determined not because of prior causes, but because of true future tense statements. If it is true that I am going to log off of philosophy forums in 10 minutes. Then according to fatalism, I MUST log off of philosophy forums in ten minutes. Why should the reason for that determinism make any difference to free will? Whether being divinely foreseen or physically determined, in both cases the outcome is the same: "you MUST do action X"

Poet
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 12, 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX, USA
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 18

Posted 06/12/06 - 08:40 AM:	#7
Ok, let's make sure I'm getting this right: If free will is an existence, then the human has the potential to do whatever they want, within the laws of the universe (for example, one cannot just leap to the moon). If all things are foreknown, then free will cannot exist (as we must do what is known that we will do). Ok, a thought: What determines that we do the actions that we do. Are we forced to do something because a Divine being foresees it, or does this aforementioned being merely foresee what our own conscious [conscious here being defined as each individual persons thought process and reaction methods] leads to. In other words, if free will does not exist, perhaps it is not a lack of existence due to [a] Divine being[s], but rather a direct result of our conscious [as defined earlier]. If that is the case, than any Divine being[s] wishing to read and know the future could merely analyze our conscious [as defined] and through that export what we will do. In simpler terms, if f(A) is always B (as in the situation [f] to each consious [A] will always produce a respective result [B] (in short, if f(A) = B), then one can determine that any Divine being could merely apply f (the situation) to any individual conscious (A) and determine their conscious decision (B). If such is a case, than foreknowledge would not have an impact on free will, as foreknowledge would be a mere application of reading the conscious and applying it to the individual situation. Any thoughts?
To the empty spirit, tired and worn Your life so frail, your mind so torn To every being who just cannot see You're not alone; you're just like me --- Josh H.

Mariner
Longing

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Jan 12, 2004
Location: Brazil
Total Topics: 35
Total Posts: 4328

Posted 06/12/06 - 09:30 AM:	#8
Poet wrote: If all things are foreknown, then free will cannot exist (as we must do what is known that we will do). Not quite. It depends on whether the foreknowing being exists in temporality or in eternity. There is no way in which a being existing in temporality can have perfect foreknowledge, if there is such a thing as free will -- because the definition of free will is nothing more, nothing less than the ability to overcome external constraints and so to make choices. The "seat" of this free will, therefore, can't be predictable in the way that you describe, otherwise there would be no question of "overcoming external constraints". In a (hard) deterministic world, there would be no available "seat", since all events would have been contained in the first event. No room for choices. On the other hand -- as Augustine and Boethius have shown -- a being who does NOT exist in time, but rather in eternity, can known all things while having no influence on the existence (or not) of free will. His knowledge comes from looking at the entire span of time "as if" it were the present. The question, "does this being know what I will do?", is badly phrased, since he knows what you are doing, at the moment in which you do it, and 5 years ago is just as present for him as 5 years in the future.
"In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don't." -- Blaise Pascal "The more I am by myself and alone, the more I have come to love myths" -- Aristotle in his later years

Poet
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 12, 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX, USA
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 18

Posted 06/13/06 - 06:50 AM:	#9
"Mariner" wrote: On the other hand -- as Augustine and Boethius have shown -- a being who does NOT exist in time, but rather in eternity, can known all things while having no influence on the existence (or not) of free will. His knowledge comes from looking at the entire span of time "as if" it were the present. The question, "does this being know what I will do?", is badly phrased, since he knows what you are doing, at the moment in which you do it, and 5 years ago is just as present for him as 5 years in the future. An interesting definition, one that I quite actually believe to be both plausible and probable. Side note: Where you quoted me on that, I was summarizing what I believed was being said, not personal beliefs/thoughts.
To the empty spirit, tired and worn Your life so frail, your mind so torn To every being who just cannot see You're not alone; you're just like me --- Josh H.

Mariner
Longing

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Jan 12, 2004
Location: Brazil
Total Topics: 35
Total Posts: 4328

0 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 06/13/06 - 06:52 AM:	#10
Poet wrote: Side note: Where you quoted me on that, I was summarizing what I believed was being said, not personal beliefs/thoughts. Duly acknowledged .
"In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don't." -- Blaise Pascal "The more I am by myself and alone, the more I have come to love myths" -- Aristotle in his later years

Page: 1 2

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.