thought experiment

Originally posted by knightmeister
....what if was the sort of person who could choose whenever I liked to defy your prediction but I could also go along with it if I wanted? The original thought experiment only asks whether we "could" decide to defy the prediction not that we always would.

You haven't given enough detail to give an answer. It could be that you are still deterministic but other inputs affect whether or not you go along with a prediction or it could be that you have a randomness generator circuit which essentially makes your actions unpredictable. Either way without further information your actions are unpredictable.
Whatever the case your original thought experiment relies on a feedback paradox and proves nothing whatsoever, though discussing it has hopefully helped you to understand determinism a bit better.
The simplest version of the feed-back paradox is the sentence "This statement is false". But if you think you can use it to disprove the existence of logic you are not going to succeed.

Originally posted by knightmeister
My concept of free will is that all actions are determined by something and have reasons attached to them but that we get to choose which deterministic influence we are under the control of. For example , once a person has given themselves over to christ via the Holy Spirit there life is essentially influenced and determined to a greater and lesser deg ...[text shortened]... ll involves determinism . it's just that there isn't only one determined track we can ride on.

As usual you try to hide the essential bits behind layers of story. However if you look closely you will notice that you said that "we" is the start of the cause chain but you do not specify how the "we" works - whether random or deterministic. Notice also that until you specify how the "we" works your view of free will is identical to my view of free will. The only minor difference being that you believe in the Holy Spirit and I don't, but since that is just a section of the causal chain it is irrelevant.
What is also interesting is that since you now admit to be a determinist, all your claims in the other threads are proved false!

Originally posted by twhitehead
As usual you try to hide the essential bits behind layers of story. However if you look closely you will notice that you said that "we" is the start of the cause chain but you do not specify how the "we" works - whether random or deterministic. Notice also that until you specify how the "we" works your view of free will is identical to my view of free wil ...[text shortened]... you now admit to be a determinist, all your claims in the other threads are proved false!

The only minor difference being that you believe in the Holy Spirit and I don't, but since that is just a section of the causal chain it is irrelevant. WHITEY

But the whole point is that the Holy Spirit is of God and not part of causality , time or any mechanistic/deterministic universe. You are placing God within the universe of causality whereas God is Uncaused , eternal and independent. I know you disagreee with this but please do try and understand the essence of my argument. The kind of "determinism" that God offers to us is not the same as the robotic kind of forced determinism that the world offers , every step of the way is still littered with choices. I only used the term determinism in relation to this argument to try to illustrate a point.

Originally posted by knightmeister
But the whole point is that the Holy Spirit is of God and not part of causality , time or any mechanistic/deterministic universe. You are placing God within the universe of causality whereas God is Uncaused , eternal and independent. I know you disagreee with this but please do try and understand the essence of my argument. The kind of "determinism" th ...[text shortened]... s. I only used the term determinism in relation to this argument to try to illustrate a point.

Actually it is you that is placing the Holy Spirit at least in part in this universe.
Anyway, to summarize your position:
1. An entity you call 'you' makes a decision to either let the Holy spirit make your decisions or not.
2. No explanation is given as to what causes this 'you' entity to make the decision or whether such decision is caused at all.
3. The decision above is therefore essentially random.
4. Since the Holy Spirit is not a causal entity any decisions it makes on your behalf are also essentially random.

Any all that is really a subject for your other threads.
Do you at least agree that the thought experiment that started this thread is little more than a well known paradox that really has nothing to do with determinism or free will?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it is you that is placing the Holy Spirit at least in part in this universe.
Anyway, to summarize your position:
1. An entity you call 'you' makes a decision to either let the Holy spirit make your decisions or not.
2. No explanation is given as to what causes this 'you' entity to make the decision or whether such decision is caused at all.
...[text shortened]... more than a well known paradox that really has nothing to do with determinism or free will?

Do you at least agree that the thought experiment that started this thread is little more than a well known paradox that really has nothing to do with determinism or free will? WHITEY

Yes , I would agree , it wasn't my thought experiment but I think it is interesting.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it is you that is placing the Holy Spirit at least in part in this universe.
Anyway, to summarize your position:
1. An entity you call 'you' makes a decision to either let the Holy spirit make your decisions or not.
2. No explanation is given as to what causes this 'you' entity to make the decision or whether such decision is caused at all.
...[text shortened]... more than a well known paradox that really has nothing to do with determinism or free will?

Anyway, to summarize your position:
1. An entity you call 'you' makes a decision to either let the Holy spirit make your decisions or not.
2. No explanation is given as to what causes this 'you' entity to make the decision or whether such decision is caused at all.
3. The decision above is therefore essentially random.
4. Since the Holy Spirit is not a causal entity any decisions it makes on your behalf are also essentially random.---------- WHITEY

RESPONSE--------------------------------

I would prefer to summarize my own position , I will do this by addressing your points.


1. An entity you call 'you' makes a decision to either let the Holy spirit make your decisions or not..........

No , an entity called me given self governance and self determination by God makes a decision that is influenced by the fact that the Holy Spirit is in my life. The Holy Spirit prompts but does not force even though a certain level of control has been handed over (freely). The Holy Spirit wants to have more control but can only do this in co-operation with our wills. Even then the decsion to reject God is still open to us and is discussed in the Bible. Speaking in tongues for example is an area where the Spirit takes control to an extent but it still requires willing co-operation for it to happen. KM

2. No explanation is given as to what causes this 'you' entity to make the decision or whether such decision is caused at all.

There is no explanation in terms of tracing the cause outside of the person. It's like asking what created God , the question is meaningless. The choice is caused by the person who is able to consider the reasoning and options before him in a self determining fashion without any one of those reasons neccessitating the choice. The person is able to act independently (just as God is able to act voluntarily without the need for an external cause because he is the ultimate cause of everything anyway). There is nothing "causing" or forcing the choice other than the person themselves. What causes a man to choose God? , the man does. We are (at times ) self determining and not determined by external causes.

3. The decision above is therefore essentially random

Since I have challenged 1 and 2 this does not follow. The decision is based on a combination of determining factors , deliberations and reasoning and the addition of the ability to self determine given by the Holy Spirit.

4. Since the Holy Spirit is not a causal entity any decisions it makes on your behalf are also essentially random.

What do you mean "not a causal entity" ? The Holy Spirit does not make decisions on my behalf. There may be occasions when I am lead to do or say certain things by his influence but that only happens because I have freely agreed or allowed it to happen in my life. The Holy Spirit (God) is not causally dependent on anything but everything else is causally dependent on him (God). Any influence of leading of the Spirit is purposeful and deliberate and self orginating (ie not dependent on another entity or cause).



Overall I would agree with you that every event and everything that happens within a mechanised , determined universe is either determined or random. However , God is not an event or a happening. He is the originator of all events and not part of a mechanised system. He can "invade" our world of randomness and determination and gives us something else.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Yes , I would agree , it wasn't my thought experiment but I think it is interesting.

But do you accept that it is little more than the "This sentence is false" paradox? That is an interesting paradox but far more easy to understand and discuss when not dressed up as some anti-determinism propaganda.
Although there is some merit in the initial though experiment as it highlights some of the problems people like you seem to have with understanding determinism especially your apparent assumption that if something is deterministic then it can be determined without knowing the input values or maybe it was that you didn't realize what input values were involved.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But do you accept that it is little more than the "This sentence is false" paradox? That is an interesting paradox but far more easy to understand and discuss when not dressed up as some anti-determinism propaganda.
Although there is some merit in the initial though experiment as it highlights some of the problems people like you seem to have with unders ...[text shortened]... ing the input values or maybe it was that you didn't realize what input values were involved.

I would have to agree that it is not a convincing thought experiment . If you want me to knock my king over I will. I'm not anti -determinist you know. My area is psychology and social science so aprt of my world view involves their being reasons why we are the way we are. I believe in a combination of determinism and self destiny.

You believe in a combination of determinism and random factors. I do believe that if you take out indeterminacy then in theory at least every human act should be predictable if we had a computer the size of the milky way and chips that worked infinitely fast.

(BTW- I will admit as an after thought that I have been caught trying a naff opening with a losing position after 15 moves , it kills me to admit it , but there you go)

Originally posted by knightmeister
I do believe that if you take out indeterminacy then in theory at least every human act should be predictable if we had a computer the size of the milky way and chips that worked infinitely fast.

Only if you knew all the inputs - hence you could not predict the actions of any human that received results from the computer as the inputs are unknown at the time of the calculation and that is what the thought experiment shows (a feedback paradox).