Quote:
|
Its not simple logic. If a being knows A will happen as opposed to B it does not mean that B did not have the potentiality of being with out have the possibility. Free choice could very well mean that a person has the potential to do act B with out the possibility. SO, is free will about potential or actual being? It is clear that two actions A and B cannot both be (and thus cannot both be possible) yet they can both have potential being. So it is the potential being and not the possible being of two events that give an actor freedom.
|
Potentiality, possibility, probability, and capacity reflect more of the nature of the human mind than the nature of reality in general -- in reality, there is only actuality.
Potentiality is a ... well, I don't want to say illusion because of my dislike of the term, but for the purposes of this thead, there you go -- because of our creativity, we are able to imagine on basis of the available information that we can do many things, but even this analysis of the possibilities is part of a systematic way of behaving. Ultimately, we are bound to pick just one of the possibilities, and like the activity of analyzing the possibilities itself, this depends on the circumstances pertaining to the deciding agent.
Quote:
|
If we accept the argument that god’s omniscience equates to predestination, then this would also apply to god himself, therefore he would not possess freewill and god without freewill would not be god.
|
Presupposes a god-entity must have free will to qualify as a god. However, the properties of a God are uncertain.
Like the rest of us, I suppose a God would act according to its nature (the entirety of its existence).