I was thinking on your omniscience-and-free-will argument when something occurred to me. If you are saying that if someone knows for certain that event A will happen then nothing other than A can happen, then aren't you also saying that if an event (or A) happens no other event was ever possible? You've previously told me you believe in free will, so this seems to be a problem. I don't doubt that I am merely confused on some point, but clarification would be appreciated. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)



Edit: Fixed an error. ("You am".... heh heh. Oops.)

[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 03-15-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

I was thinking on your omniscience-and-free-will argument when something occurred to me. If you am saying that if someone knows for certain that event A will happen then nothing other than A can happen, then aren't you also saying that if an event (or A) happens no other event was ever possible? You've previously told me you believe in free will, so this seems to be a problem. I don't doubt that I am merely confused on some point, but clarification would be appreciated. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

Are you asking that if an event happens ('A') and nobody knew it was going to happen, does that mean that only 'A' was possible? Then no. Other things were possible, or at the very least we assume that other things are possible.

If I throw a quarter and it lands on 'heads' does that mean that 'tails' wasn't a possibility? No, or at least that's not how humanity has decided on the issue.

When we say something is possible we mean something that could in fact happen; something that does not have an obstruction that prevents it from happening. If there is no known obstruction (e.g. natural laws, someone knowing what is going to happen, etc.) to something else happening (let's say 'B') then the reasonable conclusion is that it ('B') was possible as well.

Would the existance of time travel also invalidate free will? You could watch something happen, know the result, and then go back to before. You'd know what had happened, therefore no other result could come about... right?

Nobody can answer that in reality, because nobody knows how backwards time travel works (we don't even know if it's possible). If you go back in time, do you go to another alternate universe with different possibilities? Can you or can't you affect history? Nobody knows.

If it is possible, and if you cannot change history at all but know exactly what will happen, then yes, we can say that there would be no free will.

It's all clearer now. Thanks.

Anytime.

I didn't know we were allowed to dedicate threads to people...particularly with their name in the subject line.

Threads have been closed because they were in my name...

*confused*

It wasn't dedicated to Rust. It was dedicated to finding the answer to the question and Rust happens to be accurate 'round these parts.

His name is in the subject line, and the question was directed at him.

This thread is for Rust, and is therefore dedicated to him.

*pats Atomical on the head*

Digital Savior is right. If I let everyone post personal threads to each other I'd end up running an e-mail service.

Sorry, I've got to close it. Fortunately, it wasn't a very original thread anyways.

Cheers,

Lost