In Continuum.

The argument that divine knowledge is not compatible with free will is called the theological fatalism, how God knowing everything that you did and is going to do compromises our choices in life. Of course, in this context, we have to assume that he exists, and that he knows everything. Still, the term "everything" is too vast for us to comprehend, though people usually say that you should not think of God in normal human terms. He is supposedly perfect, whatever perfect is, which means that he probably thinks in a different way from all of us. Fair enough, but it still does not explain what "everything" encompasses. So philosophers all throughout human history has tried to explain what "everything" really means. There's inherent omniscience, which is the ability to know anything that one chooses to know, and can be known. Then there's total omniscience, which is knowing everything that can be known. Still, even with those definitions in place, it is still rather difficult to draw the line as to where the power of God ends and if we are but slaves to this big giant system. It comes down to whether or not God controls us with the knowledge that he possesses, or he merely watches like a bystanders, look upon the world as a spectator. 

We've heard it all before, human being saying that it is God's will when they bomb a hotel, kill their family, or rape a minor. If God's will fails, they'd turn to the devil and say that the devil asked them to do it. There are times when humans don't really want this thing called "free will", or choice. They want the blame to be placed upon a higher entity, to know that they controlled what they did to somebody else. At times like these, they don't really want the freedom to choose, because they'd be the ones at fault. So they want somebody else to pit the crime against, because if it is God that asked them to do it, then it is OK. There is a view that states that God really only knows so much, and he leaves the moral judgments to humans. I mean, if everything is controlled by God, wouldn't it be unfair to doom some of us to Hell while letting the rest go on to Heaven? It'd be unfair, which is probably why whoever came up with that idea, came up with that idea. God probably said something like "OK humans, I know everything about you, everything that you will do and everything that you have done. I am, like, powerful and awesome. But whatever that you choose to do when it comes to the morals, that's totally up to you. Really, it is." Yeah, that's what God said to the first humans, and how do I know that? Like all the other philosophers, I imagined. 

Then there is the whole idea of "predestination", where God knows where you will end up, but the path you take to get there is all up to you. I don't suppose human beings really want every step of their way to be known by a higher entity, it makes their choices in life a little redundant, in a way. Perhaps it makes people feel safer to know that God has a great plan for them, that he knows where they are all going to end up, and that we all have a place to go. It gives us a rough direction, I suppose, but he does not tell you about how you get there. Still, it really doesn't make much of a difference if there is a destination planned out for you. If you cannot change the destination, the choices are irrelevant in life. God does not have to intervene in your life for you to be controlled, to be restricted in this definite path somehow. Then people could say that the destination could be changed, then what is the use of God coming up with a destination in the first place, if it can be changed? That also makes me question the whole idea of prayers and praying, because if God has it all planned out for all of us, what's the point of praying? It isn't going to change anything, then why waste the time praying? Why not do something more productive instead? Nobody has an answer for that. 

If there is a God, I don't think he has a control over what we are doing, which supports the whole "God is not undermining my free will" school of thought. Websites usually compare God's role in this giant game of life a game of chess. He knows the possible outcomes of various actions, you can predict what is going to happen, but you don't know which one the pieces are going to pick. That merely proves that God knows the various possible outcomes, but that still makes him the manipulator in this analogy. Pieces on a chess board don't move on their own, and knowing every possible path the pieces are going to take puts the pieces into a spot. Thomas Aquinas, however, proposed a different view upon how our God views our world. He is merely a bystander, a third party in this whole thing. There is a very famous character in the comic universe called The Watcher, and what he does is that he just watches the events on Earth. Not a very useful character, though they are pretty smart. They do not intervene, they do not comment - they watch. It's a little creepy but, that's kind of how Thomas Aquinas saw God. He saw God as a being that viewed upon our world objectively, kind of like a mother bird of some kind. He created us, he gave us a few nudges a few thousand years ago (supposedly), and we are now supposed to fend for ourselves. 

It's true, if you think about it. You read the newspapers and you watch the news, and the amount of suffering around the world just seems a little... ungodly. People are dying for the most horrific reasons, inhumane things are happening all the time, and you just cannot bring yourself to believe that "God has his plans". If Thomas Aquinas is right, he doesn't. He doesn't actually have a plan that says that this thing is going to lead to this thing, and thus this thing, ergo this thing. He created everything, he created knowledge (which is kind of like cheating), and then he watches upon the world without intervening. He is outside of time, looking in, just watching us move about in our day to day lives. In truth, then, he really doesn't have a plan. If this world we are living in right now is part of his plan, I am not impressed. This world isn't exactly moving in a very right direction on the whole, with all the wars and all the killings and all the dying. You would expect God to do a better job at planning, since he did successfully build the world in seven days. That must have involved a lot of planning, but he certainly didn't plan about what went on a few thousand years after. I need to ask another question: if everything is planned by God, what about dinosaurs which were not recorded in The Book as a part of his plan? Did someone play a prank on God and slotted them into our soils? Was it the Devil? Yeah, blame the Devil for everything. 

Free will, with religion, is an illusion - here's why. Angelica asked the group if free will is a necessary ingredient to rationalization. The majority of the group thought the answer was "yes", but I thought about it for a while and objected. I don't think free will, or choice, is a necessary ingredient in rationalization our actions. As a human, we make a decision as to whether or not we pick A or we pick B. It is a simple task of picking A or B, and you end up picking A out of your own "free will". You think that you exercised your own free will, because there were no external forces in play that caused you to pick A. Still, if everything is planned and known in the first place, then the act of you "exercising your free will" and picking A isn't a part of the real "free will" any longer. It could merely be an illusion of free will, and that your choice isn't really your choice. You pick something because you want to pick that thing, and yet it could have been planned a long time ago that you would. Even without the intervention of God, that is to say if God really is a bystander in everything, knowing that someone knows where we are going is always going to be a form of bondage when it comes to our own choices. 

Ultimately, these theories about God and his omniscience were created by human beings. It is like the main problem I have with religion as a whole, the part of it I do not agree with. Here we have a bunch of human beings telling you what to believe in, when they themselves are not very sure either. They tell you what you do and where you go after you die, when all of them were alive and breathing - that doesn't make a lot of sense. Similarly, you cannot try to rationalize what God has done or is doing, simply because you don't know. We really don't, and that is the bottom line of things. Still, I believe that with the presence of a superior being, you are never going to be completely free. Remaining in the illusion that God gave us free will makes you a puppet, while knowing God has control over you merely makes you a puppet who is conscious about the strings that control him. It does not make a difference at the end of the day, you are still a puppet after all. Knowing that there are strings attached does not make things any less different from before. In fact, it could be worse. I believe that if there really is a God out there, he really doesn't have a plan at all, for any of us. That'd give sense to praying of course, but at the same time make him less powerful - and, I like that. 

The only way to be truly free, I feel, is to be free from religion and to be free from God. Like I mentioned in class yesterday, I am not trying to promote atheism here. I believe that if you are going to put faith in the presence of God, the mere fact of him knowing what you are going to do is going to compromise your free will, no matter how you see it. Angelica brought up an excellent point during the discussion by having us visualize a situation. If you know that a friend of yours is going to kill another friend, yet you don't do anything to stop that friend from being killed, does that mean that you do not play a part in the crime? I suppose what she meant was that, not doing anything is doing something, at the end of the day. Not stopping your friend from stabbing another friend is indirectly doing something. Even without an active control over the lives of us humans, God still has the ultimate control at the end of the day by letting things happen. Of course, you could argue that you should not put ordinary human terms on God, because he is supposed to be "perfect". But the word "perfection" is so ambiguous, isn't it? I do not believe God is perfect, if he exists, and he does not have a plan for any of us. Not intervening does not mean not controlling. Letting something happen without intervening is, in fact, controlling. It's abstract but, that's how I see it. 

At the end of the day, I feel, if you really want to make a choice, if you truly desire your free will, segregate yourself from religion or God. Knowing that somebody out there knows what you are doing and going to do, that alone is enough to control what you are going to do. The thing about karma, what religion teaches you about consequences, all of those are subtle ways in which they can control you, even if they lift both their hands and say that they are not involved. It boils down to your definition of "omniscience" and "free will", and no puns about my name. I believe that you are your own God, and that you have the ultimate control over who you are and who you ought to be. That idea comforts me, to know that I am responsible for myself. It's nice, really, to know that you are in absolute and complete control of where you are, and where you are going to go.