Namelesss wrote: ↑
January 13th, 2018, 6:20 pm
"If God is all-knowing, then how can I have free will?" is the OP question.
It is not a statement, it is a question.
It is two statements/propositions, linked. It asks if they can both be true.
Statements can be paradoxical, I didn't know that questions can.
A question is a statement with a question mark at the end; it asks 'is this true'.
Now notice, the first part is conditional. It says 'If God is all-knowing..'
So it simply assumes something with that characteristic. It is not making a theological point about what God, if he exists, is like as a matter of fact. It is not about Jehovah or anyone else, it is really about Determinism. 'If the future can be predicted then how can we have free will'
Just to remind you, my position is that the description 'all-knowing'
does not make sense, so we never get onto the 'then how can I have free will?"
"God/We are all Knowing; we have free-will/choice." That is both true and false.
Nevertheless, 'If God is Omni-', then we cannot have 'free-will'. Simple as that. No paradox involved.
Neither is there paradox in the 'all Knowing' version of Omni-. As I have clearly demonstrated.
There is certainly nothing clear in the above, but I am not concerned with your demonstration. My comment was that the term 'all-knowing' does not make sense. As far as I can tell, you do not address my comment as such. Your problem seems to be that I take a different approach to the OP to your own.
I Know the Razor quite well. Please feel free to educate me if I have misused it. Show me how, if you can.
The simplest theory that explains and predicts all the phenomena observed. Simple as that.
If you disagree, feel free...
You insert it for no reason. For example you write:
Occam's Razor requires the simplest theory that answers, describes, and predicts.
Nothing more complicated.
It doesn't 'require' anything. It says that simple theories are better theories
, but it doesn't follow that simple theories are more likely to be correct
than complicated ones.
The quote above came after:
Nonsense! Aristotle's 'either/or.. true/false.. is an error. There is more and reality cannot be reduced to a t/f proposition. That toxic error has polluted Western thought since!
To expect Universal Truth to be reduced to an easily digestible 'either/or' (which is false; QM has demonstrated it's fallacy and obsolescence (Good bye Aristotle) and will, eventually, be found fruitless.
I cannot see that the remark on Occam's Razor has anything to do with either of those two remarks. It just seems to be thrown it at random. Which is why I can only guess that you have some esoteric interpretation of it.