Lay it all out!

There's a problem with the free will defence

Page 1 2 3 » 58 comments
Feb 21, 2017
CrashCourse posted:
The Problem of Evil: Crash Course Philosophy #13
Watch Video
There's a problem with the free will defence. If a truly omnipotent being exist it can make the logically impossible happen. Like make 4 squares form into a circle, then he could make humans naturally good robots while maintaining free will, despite obvious contradictions. If he can't do something logically impossible then he has a limit. Logic.
13
Jul 5, 2017
There's more backstory to that defense than shown in the video. (P. S. Love the Hakai Profile Picture)
2
Jul 9, 2017
Also what's the point of praying to God if you believe he can't interfere in your life
9
Jul 25, 2017
u said robots, that;s really not free will
4
That's the paradox of omnipotence. If God can do anything, does that mean he can make something so heavy that even he can't lift it?
20
Aug 13, 2017
You are awesome... Bruh... NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE argument...
2
Aug 13, 2017
Galaxy Cat, Destroyer of Worlds said:
That's the paradox of omnipotence. If God can do anything, does that mean he can make something so heavy that even he can't lift it?
Your name is me
2
Aug 14, 2017
omid ganjavi said:
u said robots, that;s really not free will
He said "despite obvious contradictions". He was trying to make the point that God can't actually do anything. The fact that it contradicts is what shows that.
3
Aug 16, 2017
r s, the assumption is that a god is the law maker. As the law maker, it adheres also to those laws. Thus it is limited only by the limits it places upon itself. If all things good are derived from those laws, then it can be said that all things good originate from that god. Evil then is anything outside of the laws created by that god. Free will exists between these two realities, but ONLY if good and evil make demands. Law exists which demands obedience and requires justice for breaking it. Temptation demands disobedience and promises instant gratification. Both make demands and gives birth to free will. Thus free will could not exist until an omniscent being were able to define the line and say -- this is good, this is bad AND for there to be some incentive to both. So a god could not create beings with free will and have all beings programmed with some divine algorithm that would ensure good behavior, if free will requires some inherent inclination to do evil. And how could there be some inherent inclination towards evil if there is not already evil existing in a living being's environment. Hence, natural evil. Otherwise that god would have had to come and teach evil to man.
11
Aug 21, 2017
^This.
1
Aug 25, 2017
Or perhaps this is simply the outcome of it and the best one at that. Its like say you are a time traveler and you have all these notes and it says who are the ones who commited terrible things. You kill that person but the outcome of that action would allow someone commiting an even greater evil. Like the lesser of two evils kind of effect. I mean if you think it this way, there is no good and evil if you are an omnigod. Only order or chaos. Good and evil is solely based on the perception of these things youve created but perception is a product of consciousness therefore that being has to have freewill. So basically this omnigod have made the impossible outcomes possible however because we have freewill we are entitled to disagree or agree.
0
Aug 25, 2017
wanderingbufoon, free will exists only where there is order. Chaos in the absence of order is much different to randomness.

Imagine two interrogation type rooms with a door on one side and a one-way mirror on another side. Imagine opening the door to the first room and seeing a fractured reality where colors are inconsistent, sounds are produced without cause, and things that are falling which would collide with other objects and bounce away instead pass through but then change direction for no reason at all. No movement is predictable, and every object you try and interact with doesn't behave the way you expected. There is literally no way to predict the outcome of any action, and any interaction with anything in that room is meaningless. This is what true chaos would like. An observer seeing all this from the other side of the mirror would observe any and all persons entering that room eventually curling into a ball and floating there in nothingness.

The scond room is where order is maintained. When you enter immediately your senses take in the dimensions of the room, the color of the walls, the buzzing of the lights, and the smells associated with that room. All interactions are meaningful and logic and reason can be had as to the consequence of actions. An observer from the other side of the glass will see very different behaviors. In this realm all things can be argued, i.e. determinism vs free will.

2
Aug 26, 2017
Unless God loves evil just as much as he loves good.
It takes a great deal of skill to get smiles out of playing the villain, right?
So what if God just loves playing along with the antics of blasphemous humans and their evil deeds?
I don't believe in a God, or Gods. But still, why the heck could that not be the explanation??
2
Aug 26, 2017
Omnipotence means all-powerful, not all illogical. However, given the possible dimension that exist, we can see that a straight line can be made into a circle
0
Aug 26, 2017
Haitaka123, because that would make that god a contradiction and incapable of exercising any will at all. It's like saying a dark room is also a well lit room. To argue that that becomes a simple matter of perception won't change the fact that objects are hard to identify in a dark room vs a well lit one. If a god were both inherently good and evil, then there is no possible way to identify what IS good since it is also a given that it loves evil just as much. What would be considered good, in one case or in every case, may turn out to have always been evil. In which case it would be said there was no good to begin with, and vice versa.(Good in this case being the hard to identify object in a dark room).
1
Aug 26, 2017
Jac M., you are confusing subjective perceptions and objective, or universal, truths.
0
Aug 26, 2017
How so?
0
Aug 26, 2017
Jac M., a circle is a circle. A straight line is a straight line. This is an objective view. However, if you zoom in on a circle until all you can see is a straight line, this is a subjective view. But no matter how you shift your perspective, you cannot make a straight line a circle. So while it's true that you can get a straight line from what is originally a circle, you can never get a circle from what was originally a straight line.
0
Aug 29, 2017
Who sais he would want us to be perfect robots? if we only made the choices he wanted then it wouldn't be free will, or atleast not the will he wants. He wants us to choose him because we love him and understand.
If we were just robots the Devil would be going, "HA THEY ONLY LOVE YOU BECAUSE2 YOU MADE THEM LIKE THAT!." Got to consider th bigger picture that While God is Logical he's also Loveing/ if he didn't have Love how could he be a Good God?
4
Sep 2, 2017
if He will do that , He is not being just anymore. God is just. He is treating everyone very equally He is letting man have its own choice because He is not being unfair. You have to make your own choice whether to follow the evil or the good.
0
Sep 6, 2017
MegaReaver MickeyBot said:
Who sais he would want us to be perfect robots? if we only made the choices he wanted then it wouldn't be free will, or atleast not the will he wants. He wants us to choose him because we love him and understand.
If we were just robots the Devil would be going, "HA THEY ONLY LOVE YOU BECAUSE2 YOU MADE THEM LIKE THAT!." Got to consider th bigger picture that While God is Logical he's also Loveing/ if he didn't have Love how could he be a Good God?
Just to be completely clear, your argument is [insert the most horrible thing that has happened] is justified because [insert some alleged good that results from free will].

Take the example you gave: You're saying that children being abducted and repearedly raped and tortured by series killers until they die days or weeks later (my example but nevertheless something that everyone knows has happened dozens if not hundreds of times in this world) is justified because it allows your sycophantic god to truly be loved by some of us. Anyone who believes that is either being stupid (in that they hold a very important position they have not given sufficient consideration) or is a sadistic psychopath (I'm confident you're just being stupid) and deserves to be publicly shamed.

1
Sep 6, 2017
One Love
0
Sep 7, 2017
Attempting to put limits on the unknowable is illogical in and of itself. It's the problem of "Can God heat up a Hot Pocket so hot, that He Himself could not touch/eat it?" The Christian answer is no one can know, for if you attempt an answer, you're boasting about something we cannot grasp. That's where Theodicy comes in. To answer or try to answer is, of course, only human.
0
Sep 7, 2017
Tophinator, the problem with the omnipotence paradox is that it's attempting to place a limit on what is infinite in nature. In calculus it's literally called taking the limit, and that's how dividing by zero can be quantified as well as when you're dealing with series. However, taking limits only applies to finite beings dealing with infinite series, so asking a question like "can God create a rock so heavy even He can't lift it..." already assumes limits. However, if a god were an infinite being, then by nature all of it's attributes are infinite. So a god can create a rock it cannot lift in one instant, and in the very next instant grow beyond that limit and be able to lift it, and this chain of superseding the limit it has created continues endlessly. This is simply a possibility as to how the paradox is resolved, but in reality it's probably much more simple. Paradoxes mostly exist due to mathematical abstraction being outside of the physical realm.

As far as theodicy, it occurs due to a misunderstanding of the will of the infinite being in control.

0
Sep 8, 2017
I also think about that issue with that defence a lot. But if God is perfect should we not assume that in infinite knowledge He chose the best way out of them all? This way we still have free choice, and can choose to be good. Of it were not this way the complaint would be we are forced to be perfect, (this is one thought I have had on the answer to this question, but not necessarily the answer).
0
Page 1 2 3 » 58 comments