This is an essay I wrote for an art school I'm trying to get into that requires that I write 3-5 pieces that can be short stories/essays/poems or some sort of combination. This is basically the only one that I have completed, though I am very close to being done with a second piece. This essay discusses whether or not free will can coexist along with the ultimate foreknowledge of God's actions. Trying not to offend anybody, I do not really discuss the existence of God here. This is a sort of philosophical explanation, and it is not too long. But I make my points.
Address:
[url]http://roskarnolkov.deviantart.com/art/Omniscience-Versus-Free-Will-146344470[/url]
Entire essay:
Omniscience and Free Will
Most Westerners, it is safe to say, have a strong but passive belief in the concept of free will. That is, the power to choose what one does without any supernatural hindrances involved in one's choosing. Perhaps most people in Western society believe this simply because they are conditioned to believe such; they are brought up believing it.
However, while most Western individuals believe that the notion of free will is factual, many of the same individuals contend the same for the existence of an omniscient God. This God, in most Western minds, being omniscient, knows each individual's actions long before the individual actually carries these actions out. This infinite knowledge gives Him access to everything about each individual's life before the individual even exists!
Most Western persons would agree with both of these concepts. However, the majority of them may not actually be aware that there is a conflict of interest in simultaneously holding both of these beliefs. In viewing both of these ideas as truth, one commits the Orwellian act of doublethink. However, before understanding the conflict and asking the question that this essay strives to answer, one should first consider a couple of things.
Imagine the Judeo-Christian god: namely, God. While the parties of Judaism and Christianity disagree on many subjects, one thing that they do agree upon is the belief in a single God, this God, as well as being omnipotent (All-powerful), omnipresent (Always present everywhere), and omniscient (All-knowing), also grants mankind free will. Now, in this essay, it is not vital that the reader believes in God. That is not the topic being discussed. The topic at hand is the perceived conflict between complete foreknowledge and free will.
Now, still, before posing the question, imagine the familiar scenario of the Garden of Eden. In this place, God is said to have created Adam, the first man, and out of Adam's rib came Eve, the first woman. God warned and instructed Adam not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and, in turn, Adam warned Eve. The two, being tempted, ate of the tree anyway. God, who knew that they would eat of the tree from the start, then became angry, and punished the both of them, despite the fact that their disobedience came as no surprise to Him at all. The two sinners were then banished from the garden and sentenced to live the rest of their days in misery and, eventually, face death. However, had the two not eaten of the tree, then they would have contradicted God's eternal knowledge, which stated that they would eat of the tree, and knew exactly when and how it would happen. Despite this, however, God, in His infinite knowledge, had still become angry.
Now, a question: why had God, Knower of all things, gotten upset when Adam and Eve partook of the fruit when He knew that they would it of it from the beginning? And, if the two hadn't eaten of the tree, then wouldn't this have gone against God's foreknowledge of them eating it? Indeed, it is likely that no reasonable answer to the first question will ever be given to mortal minds. But the answer to the second question is, of course, yes: not eating of the tree would have gone against God's foreknowledge. Therefore the two would have inevitably eaten of the tree, because no one can ever contradict God's foreknowledge and omniscience of one's actions. So it would appear as if everyone's actions, including those of Adam and Eve, are subject to God's ultimate knowledge.
Reading this, one might be wondering the same question that this essay is about to ask: does free will truly exist? This is the question that is being answered now.
Examining all that has been written here thus far, one is apt to say no, that free will is simply an illusion. That one may feel as if one has free will, but one truly does not, since all of one's actions must follow what God already knows. But before deciding upon this, consider one more thing.
Imagine a man sitting inside of his home in his leisure, deciding whether or not he will go to work and water his garden. Now, this man has a decision to make: to remain in rest or to go to work. It is completely up to him. No one, not even God, is interfering in his choice. God does know what the man will do, but He does not choose for him. The man has to choose for himself.
Obviously, deciding whether one will work in his garden or not is not a significant area in one's life, and the choice that one makes in such a situation will not make a difference either way. However, this allegory of the leisurely man and his waiting job can be applied to many other circumstances in one's life. God knows what one will do, but He does not control the decision made. God simply knows how one will use one's free will, but he is not a totalitarian force that controls everyone's choices and fate. Therefore, there is absolutely no conflict between the concepts of God's foreknowledge and man's free will, foiling the opening of this essay's reference to one. Whether or not an omniscient God exists is not the issue. Man's free will exists either way. There is no committed act of doublethink. Man chooses his way, and God knows the way chosen.
You do realize that no humans have free will? No humans are the same but they all act in the same way, what people think free will is just your brain firing off commands which are the same in almost every brain, it's the same thing when a middle aged man thinks he is acting by himself when buying a sports car. But it's a good essay anyway.
[QUOTE=broo20;18875605]You do realize that no humans have free will? No humans are the same but they all act in the same way, what people think free will is just your brain firing off commands which are the same in almost every brain, it's the same thing when a middle aged man thinks he is acting by himself when buying a sports car. But it's a good essay anyway.[/QUOTE]
You make claims based on opinion and incomplete research. It's impossible to verify our possession (or lack) of 'free will', thus claims are nonsensical. Put forward a discussion point. That's how this kind of philosophy works.
[QUOTE=Silentlink;18888905]You make claims based on opinion and incomplete research. It's impossible to verify our possession (or lack) of 'free will', thus claims are nonsensical. Put forward a discussion point. That's how this kind of philosophy works.[/QUOTE]
The [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle]Heisenberg uncertainty principle[/url] verifies that we have free will.
[QUOTE=AaronTAB;18926054]The [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle]Heisenberg uncertainty principle[/url] verifies that we have free will.[/QUOTE]
Which means there is no God that is all-knowing.
[QUOTE=AaronTAB;18926054]The [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle]Heisenberg uncertainty principle[/url] verifies that we have free will.[/QUOTE]
I can't say I entirely agree with that.
Wouldn't it merely follow that our will, while enacting itself upon another aspect of reality (in the most simplistic case, photons), is only following out a predetermined choice on its own?
You could also argue that our will is probably made up of extremely small building blocks of matter, as well. Somewhere in the brain, perhaps.
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.