Free Will or Omniscience? (Sorry if i misspelled omniscience)

[Nepycros]

Sorry, I didnt want to revisit this topic, but I realized that I just had to post in it. And guess what. Me posting this is causing you to post in it as well.

That is SO not true!

[Pineapple]

What's the difference between "true free will" and "effectively free will for all intents and purposes," QuantumT?

[maverixk]

Seeing as the entire extent of the character's existence is formed entirely by which words the author chooses to put down

I don't see it this way.

Look, I know how it is when you write something, it feels like the story is writing itself, but it's not. You are in compete control, whether or not it feels like it.

[Chromatophore]

Seeing as the entire extent of the character's existence is formed entirely by which words the author chooses to put down

I don't see it this way.

Look, I know how it is when you write something, it feels like the story is writing itself, but it's not. You are in compete control, whether or not it feels like it.

How can you be so sure?

[maverixk]

How can you be so sure?

Because I can make the character do whatever i want, regardless of anything. whether that anything is how i feel the character would think, or how i personally would like to see the story play out.

[QuantumT]

Seeing as the entire extent of the character's existence is formed entirely by which words the author chooses to put down

I don't see it this way.

Look, I know how it is when you write something, it feels like the story is writing itself, but it's not. You are in compete control, whether or not it feels like it.

How can you be so sure?

What was the first thing the character did? Was it what the author chose to write down? It was? I see. Hmm how about the second thing? Also what the author chose to write down? Very interesting. How about everything else the character did? All subject to the whims of the author? I see. You argue that this character, whose every action, thought, and even existence is completely controlled by the author has anything worth calling free will?

What's the difference between "true free will" and "effectively free will for all intents and purposes," QuantumT?

I'm not sure where I made that distinction. I'm arguing against an OO creator, not free will.

[Pineapple]

Let's take the book example. Everything the characters do fit their character. For the purposes of the story, the characters themselves have "free will." They make their own choices in the story. However, apparently this isn't "true free will" because they're only doing what the author writes down?

[Chromatophore]

Also are we assuming that God has free will?

[QuantumT]

Let's take the book example. Everything the characters do fit their character. For the purposes of the story, the characters themselves have "free will." They make their own choices in the story. However, apparently this isn't "true free will" because they're only doing what the author writes down?

But that's not true. The character does whatever the writer decides. If that happens to be something that doesn't fit their character, that just makes it a crappy book. They still do it though.

[BluePriest]

Assuming God exists (which he does) and is omnipotent (which he is), then he can create a being that has free will.

God can do anything, even if it seems paradoxal. He can make an object too heavy for him to lift, and then lift it.

[Pineapple]

"Okay, let's take the short story "Refresh, Refresh" as an example. Two kids beat up the messenger because, well, they want to shoot the messenger. The characters of the story grew up in an environment that basically cultivated glorified violence. The unit question is "Does free will exist?" I tried to argue to my teacher that "The characters don't have free will because they're controlled by the guy with the pen", but my teacher tried to convince me to ignore that and get into the story. To interpret free will as "something that is effectively free will for all intents and purposes." To answer with whether or not the children had the capacity to fight against the causes of their environment. Now, I think that it's a crappy unit question that has more to do with your position on this matter than analyzing literature, but that doesn't mean I can't answer the question with support from the short story.

An old definition of omnipotency: the ability to do whatever is reasonable. Playing with words by saying, "This apple is not an apple. Is it an apple?" achieves nothing in defining the capacity of God.

[QuantumT]

Assuming God exists (which he does) and is omnipotent (which he is), then he can create a being that has free will.

God can do anything, even if it seems paradoxal. He can make an object too heavy for him to lift, and then lift it.

Once you throw logic out the window, any further debate becomes completely pointless. Have a nice day.