Welcome to Gaia! ::

The topic of this debate is the question of if determinism is compatible with freedom. The philosophical dictionary at http://philosophypages.com/dy/ defines the two key terms this way:


Determinism

Belief that, since each momentary state of the world entails all of its future states, it must be possible (in principle) to offer a causal explanation for everything that happens. When applied to human behavior, determinism is sometimes supposed to be incompatible with the freedom required for moral responsibility. The most extreme variety of determinism in this context is fatalism.

Freedom {Lat. libertas Ger. Freiheit}}

The human capacity to act (or not to act) as we choose or prefer, without any external compulsion or restraint. Freedom in this sense is usually regarded as a presupposition of moral responsibility: the actions for which I may be praised or blamed, rewarded or punished, are just those which I perform freely. The further question of whether choice, the volition or will to act, is itself free or subject to ordinary causality raises the issue of determinism in human conduct. But most modern philosophers have held that (internal) determination of the will by desire or impulse does not diminish the relevant sense of moral responsibility.



Some philosophers, called compatibilists, believe that freedom can exist within a deterministic universe. (These philosophers need not be determinists themselves -- they only need to believe that if determinism is true then free will remains true.) Others, incompatibilists, believe that if determinisim is true that eliminates the possibility of freedom.

Note that this debate is not about whether determinism is actually true. To approach this question we have to first take it as a given that determinism is true, and work from there to determine what the consequences of this would be for personal freedom.

I see two types of determinism.

One is religious determinism, where a deity knows everything and can do anything, which I believe to be incompatible with true freedom. Because even if said deity told you what you're going to do, you would be unable to change it as such deity would then be wrong, and thus didn't know you were going to do that (contradicting the aforementioned knowledge of everything).

The other is atheistic determinism, where the future is technically determined, but it is impossible for anyone to know enough to take advantage of this. This I believe to be effectively compatible with freedom, as no one can ever take advantage of this sort of determinism.

From my post in the fate thread:
For some people though, I think that the idea that there is a being that controls only some fate, but not all of it seems to be a contradiction due to the assumption that in order for this being to control fate it first needs to be aware of future events. And if this being already knows everything that you are going to do than there is no room for any choice whatsoever. For those who have entertained this idea I think that there is some certainty that can be had about at least the possibility of the "middle" position. First off, it is a mistake to assume that knowledge of the future is the same as fate. If you think about a time when someone told you their plans to do a specific thing, did you suddenly feel like you had some kind of control over that person's actions? Probably not unless you are somewhat insane. In this example it is easy to see that the knowledge of the other person's future actions were caused by them telling you what their intended choice was. Now try to imagine being able to view the future as a timeline. As in the above example, it is obvious that for any event to appear in the timeline someone first needs to make the choice that causes it to be there. And so, the ability to see the whole timeline of future events and even the ability to add some causes of your own ("miracles") still dosn't necessarily negate all free choice.

Wow! What a thorough post. I never thought of the fact that God not only knows the future, but the possible future as well. That doesn't exactly throw a wrench in my theory, but it does leave a small hole. Thanks for giving me something to think about.