MRDOD: I hope to come back to address your points at some point, at the moment I'm doing some research on just how predictable the universe can (theoretically) be. I've always been under the impression that while the universe can be predicted to exact probability, to the point of virtually being predictable, it's not possible to predict everything perfectly even on a theoretical level. But, as I say, I don't know enough on the subject to reliably debate the point with you at the moment.
Zero raised some points I think I can more reliably address, so I'll see how I go with those for now...
Zero132132 wrote:If it's simply possibilities, then the other element is random, variable, and still not up to human action; God is still more responsible for a human's actions, in this scenario, than the human.
Not random. We're still in control of our decisions, even if we're more likely to choose a certain direction. An alchoholic is far more likely to take another drink than not, but he's still more than capable of not doing so.
No, and I never suggested it was. It is, however, his fault if he knows in advance the consequence or potential consequences of his actions.
If he knows inevitable consequences, sure. But not potential consequences. He takes a certain responsibility, but not all of it. The decisions, afterall, are ours.
This is a bad analogy. If the US nukes other nations, it's because of the decisions of a head executive. This executive is, himself, influenced by other events. The capacity for using nuclear weapons is only one of several preconditions for actually using them. Conversely, under the system you've proposed, whether the US nukes or doesn't is based entirely on variability. The capacity is the only precondition, and whether it happens or not is simply random.
Humans make decisions based on a number of variables in life. They deal with things in different ways. But those decisions are still their own, even if they might be predisposed to make one decision or another. Humans have instincts the same as any other animal, but the thing that sets us apart is that we're not ruled by those instincts. We're capable of overuling our instincts and making decisions that go against our inate nature.
In a universe featuring a diety who's supposed to know everything, it would seem impossible that it shouldn't be so. If he simply knew the possible outcomes, then what of the prophesies in the bible? According to you, is revelations only one possibility among infinite possible ways for the world to end?
Revelations is an event precipitated by non-human entities. Either by God himself, or "Satan" and the "Antichrist". These are infinitely more predictable because they are pure good or pure evil.
If you design a computer program with specific rules, you're the only one who can be given credit for the outcomes of the program.
If I create a machine that randomly generates numbers between 1 and 100, am I responsible for it generating a 7 or is it?
God made us, yes. He gave us the capacity for good and evil. But that choice is still ours, nothing ever forces us to make one choice over another.
Similarly, if you design a universe with specific physical laws and rules that dictate behavior of various beings you're judging, even if variability in decision is hardwired into the universe, you can't blame the beings themselves, because they can't choose whatever random variables decide their actions. If they can, what do they base this decision off of?
They can use their own mind to consider the consequences of their actions. Humans are the main unpredictable variable I'm talking about here.
If you claim that there are possibilities, but not certainties, then human actions boil down to probabilities, and you can't really condemn anyone for choosing one action over another, because it's just based on randomness. If you say it's somehow based on his character, than his character must also be based on something, so it boils down either to determinism, with god setting up all the rules, or probabilities simply hidden somewhere else, like in determining the value of someone's character, so that character can in turn decide what actions a person makes or doesn't make. Either way, God's the one who set up the system, and whatever outcomes there are can only be credited to him.
Not randomness at all. Humans don't automatically make decisions, fated or based on random chance. They weigh up the factors and make a decision. Sometimes they can't even do that, they're left with so much indecision. All humans are predisposed to certain actions, and most actions will make other actions more or less probable. But hardly any make them inevitable.
Addictive drugs will increase the probability of a person taking the same drug again. But that person is able to think about their decisions, and go against their instinct to take the drug again and through sheer force of will stop themselves.
When I said laws, I meant physical laws of the universe, and the four forces that dictate what all matter does in the universe. These laws, we can't break. I can't simply decide that gravity isn't valid, and go to the moon at twice the speed of light while telling Einstien to go fuck himself. I could go murder someone, which would break a law, but that wasn't the kind of law I meant. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Ah, fair enough, but do these laws effect our mind's capacity for free thought?
