Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Albert (albertwagner_at_cox.net)
Date: 02/18/05
- Next message: Dave Seaman: "Re: Probability theory in (0,1) (Was Re: does sqrt(2) exist in CM?)"
- Previous message: M.J.T. Guy: "Re: " Find a solution to: f(x^2) - g(x^2) = f(x)+g(x) = f(2x) + g(2x) - 2 ; f ,g real ""
- In reply to: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:24:30 -0600
Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote:
<snipped Tony's retreat from admission of defeat to the beginning
of the argument all over again, hoping thereby to negate his defeat>
>>>>How about another gedanken:
>>>>
>>>>Assume it is the morning of February 5, 2006.
>>>>Assume that a being exists that is outside of time. (Or if that
>>>>is too hard, then assume a being exists that can travel in time,
>>>>backwards and forwards.)
>>>>Lets call this being The Traveler.
>>>>Assume that this creature has no control over you and that you
>>>>have free will.
>>>>
>>>>You are about to choose your breakfast, Cheerios or Rice Crispies.
>>>>
>>>>Sitting beside you is The Traveler. He holds in his hand a
>>>>sealed envelope.
>>>>
>>>>You ask him, "Do you know which cereal I will choose?"
>>>>
>>>>He replies, "Yes, It's written down in this sealed envelope"
>>>>
>>>>You reply, "OK, let's test".
>>>>
>>>>You then make a choice, exercising your free will.
>>>>
>>>>Lets say you choose Cheerios.
>>>>
>>>>The Traveler then hands you the sealed envelope.
>>>>
>>>>You open it and find, in your own handwriting the message: "The
>>>>Traveler was here today, February 6, 2006, and asked me to write
>>>>down what I had for breakfast yesterday. I had Cheerios."
>>>>
>>>>Now, was your free will violated in any way?
>>>
>>>This is an entirely different situation.
>>
>>ROTFLMAO.
>>
>>>In this case the foreknowledge
>>>was accurate, and is explained by the traveler having gone into the
>>>future and returned with foreknowledge. This is the source of the
>>>Traveler's knowledge, and it turns out to be correct. No contradiction
>>>there (except with realtivity of course).
>>
>>THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
<snip>
I won't play this game with you anymore. I have proven to you
that your claim that there is a contradiction between free will
and an omniscient god, is simply wrong. I don't intend to repeat
it ad infinitum. Live with it.
--
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the
range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally
impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it."
-- George Orwell as Syme in "1984"
- Next message: Dave Seaman: "Re: Probability theory in (0,1) (Was Re: does sqrt(2) exist in CM?)"
- Previous message: M.J.T. Guy: "Re: " Find a solution to: f(x^2) - g(x^2) = f(x)+g(x) = f(2x) + g(2x) - 2 ; f ,g real ""
- In reply to: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
