The Philosophy Thread

[Bengals78]

I believe I am alone.
Therefore you all are parts of a subconsciousness dream I do not believe is real.
I am not actually real so you are all part of my dream

[mqtirishfan]

Digging up this old thread in hopes that someone can explain or guide me to an explanation regarding the problem of a reverse or backward causal relationship between freely made choices and God's foreknowledge. I understand the traps of foreknowledge fairly well, but I'm having a hard time figuring out where the problem comes in if you make the claim that because I Freely make a decision, God knows it, due to his foreknowledge. I feel that my actions are still free, and those actions caused God's knowledge that I would do so.

[Jvig43]

I think what it comes down to is if God knows the outcome why give us the choice to begin with.

[mqtirishfan]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

I think what it comes down to is if God knows the outcome why give us the choice to begin with.

I understand this position, but if reverse causality were possible in this one case, wouldn't that render the problem kind of pointless and make such a judgment fair?

[Bert Macklin]

How is this thread not filled with Philosoraptor?

[Bert Macklin]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

I think what it comes down to is if God knows the outcome why give us the choice to begin with.

You watch supernatural? Cas posed a great question to dean. "what would you rather peace or freedom?"

[Jvig43]

Eh I would need to brush up on my medieval philosophy to really get into this. I think I wrote a paper on this once but most of this area of philosophy I sort of pushed to the back of my head when I got through with the class. I also may not be understanding the question right but what youre saying is that because I have free will this causes God's forknowledge of my actions? I guess the problem is if God is testing us whether we make the right decisions or not and we are free to do so but he knows what the outcome will be anyway why create us in the first place? I mean sure you could say you have free will which isn't effected by God, but if youre path is already known it seems to weaken the basis of free will ( the whole idea is your path isn't chosen but here it would be). Idk does that make sense I'm giving you what I recall the conversation going like in my medieval class so idk if I'm helping.

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by Bert Macklin

You watch supernatural? Cas posed a great question to dean. "what would you rather peace or freedom?"

Are those mutually exclusive? I often associate peace with the idea of being free. Those are both very liberal terms that can mean a plurality of different things, but most oftentimes when people fight or seek "freedom", what they're truly looking for is peace or serenity in their own lives, free from the oppression of others that inhibit that peace.

God I hate philosophy. I spent all year learning about all your fun, wicked theories in regards to literary theory, and my god it made my head explode. Anything outside absurdism, existentialism, and nihilism has no place in my head.

[Jvig43]

I'm excited to attend school for another seven years on this stuff so back off APS.

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

I'm excited to attend school for another seven years on this stuff so back off APS.

Do you guys study all the super fun people like Lacan, Lyotard, Derrida, Baudrillard and Kristeva and such? Or do you guys tend to focus on more philosophically based stuff?

I'm curious, I've never taken a Philosophy class. I took Political Science, and that had alot of philosophy in it, but never anything really heavy.

[Jvig43]

We read lyotard earlier this semester in postmodernism, he was one of the better philosophers to read but other than that no one else on your list. It's crazy how much he called about what was going to happen in terms of the universities and education in his post modern condition. My main focus since last semester has been pretty much all on existentialism tho. I'm in a heideggar course right now and it is ******* awesome.

[Bert Macklin]

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

We read lyotard earlier this semester in postmodernism, he was one of the better philosophers to read but other than that no one else on your list. It's crazy how much he called about what was going to happen in terms of the universities and education in his post modern condition. My main focus since last semester has been pretty much all on existentialism tho. I'm in a heideggar course right now and it is ******* awesome.

Most of my interest in stuff like that stems from existentialism. Do you guys get to read fiction too, as examples? Waiting for Godot radically changed the way I view the world, it's about as much existentialism as one text could ever handle. I do love me some postmodernism though...We learn alot about Gramsci and Raymond Williams as well, constructing on meaning and so on and so forth

[Jvig43]

for novels/plays we read the plague by Camus, thus spoke zarathustra by Nietzsche, and No exit/the flies by Sartre who is my boy so I went out and bought Nausea as well.

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

for novels/plays we read the plague by Camus, thus spoke zarathustra by Nietzsche, and No exit/the flies by Sartre who is my boy so I went out and bought Nausea as well.

You should check out some of Kierkegaard's early stuff on absurdism, feeds directly into existentialist thought. Really interesting stuff. Sartre has his moments, but Nietzsche and Machiavelli are obviously my favorite philosophers to read. There's something to be said for a man who believes old people should be ground up and used to fuel our machines because they don't contribute to the socio-political-economic sphere anymore.

Also, Nietzche's writings on "the Superman" are some of the most interesting musings I've ever read in any format.

But yeah, if you want to experience the literary sensibilities of philosophical movements, check out Waiting for Godot. You can read it in an hour, but my God does it ask some pressing questions. I love it.

[mqtirishfan]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

Eh I would need to brush up on my medieval philosophy to really get into this. I think I wrote a paper on this once but most of this area of philosophy I sort of pushed to the back of my head when I got through with the class. I also may not be understanding the question right but what youre saying is that because I have free will this causes God's forknowledge of my actions? I guess the problem is if God is testing us whether we make the right decisions or not and we are free to do so but he knows what the outcome will be anyway why create us in the first place? I mean sure you could say you have free will which isn't effected by God, but if youre path is already known it seems to weaken the basis of free will ( the whole idea is your path isn't chosen but here it would be). Idk does that make sense I'm giving you what I recall the conversation going like in my medieval class so idk if I'm helping.

I feel like I've squared away my concern with the implications of God knowing our actions in regard to salvation. My concern is primarily on the feasibility of reverse causation in determining God's knowledge in the first place. I've run into the problem that nobody seems to discuss the concept in this field.

[Jvig43]

I've read alot of Kierkegaard's stuff, it was interesting but he was my least favortie philosopher in my existential class. One of my first paper's I ever wrote for philosophy was on Machiavelli, I had a blast doing it. Nietzsche's superman or overman gets a bad rep for his sister associating that work with the Nazis party.

[mqtirishfan]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

Nietzsche's superman or overman gets a bad rep for his sister associating that work with the Nazis party.

Unlike Heidegger who ****** up his own legacy with those wonderful people. I think it's absurd for people to associate Nietzsche with the Nazis, much like the swastika being stolen by them.

[Jvig43]

Yeah I also think it's absurd to excuse heidegger, a ******* brilliant man, for his allegiance to the Nazis party because he was politically naive. I've read two biographies on him and both authors tried pulling that card and my professor teaching the class went with it. Heidegger seriously has some awesome philosophies but I will not excuse him for being such a huge advocate of the Nazis party. I don't care what his intentions were.

[Brothgar]

Originally Posted by mqtirishfan

Digging up this old thread in hopes that someone can explain or guide me to an explanation regarding the problem of a reverse or backward causal relationship between freely made choices and God's foreknowledge. I understand the traps of foreknowledge fairly well, but I'm having a hard time figuring out where the problem comes in if you make the claim that because I Freely make a decision, God knows it, due to his foreknowledge. I feel that my actions are still free, and those actions caused God's knowledge that I would do so.

This is just my guess but the idea of foreknowledge implies a preordained destiny. Free will, on the other hand, implies a possibility of two outcomes. So if the future is predetermined then free will can't exist.

[Jvig43]

Originally Posted by broth223

This is just my guess but the idea of foreknowledge implies a preordained destiny. Free will, on the other hand, implies a possibility of two outcomes. So if the future is predetermined then free will can't exist.

This is what I was trying to say as well

Originally Posted by Jvig43

I guess the problem is if God is testing us whether we make the right decisions or not and we are free to do so but he knows what the outcome will be anyway why create us in the first place? I mean sure you could say you have free will which isn't effected by God, but if youre path is already known it seems to weaken the basis of free will ( the whole idea is your path isn't chosen but here it would be).

[mqtirishfan]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

Yeah I also think it's absurd to excuse heidegger, a ******* brilliant man, for his allegiance to the Nazis party because he was politically naive. I've read two biographies on him and both authors tried pulling that card and my professor teaching the class went with it. Heidegger seriously has some awesome philosophies but I will not excuse him for being such a huge advocate of the Nazis party. I don't care what his intentions were.

I think that Sartre's thoughts on freedom and responsibility of actions applies well to Heidegger's political leanings. No matter what the consequences of rejecting the Nazis was, he is as responsible for his actions as someone who set out to eradicate the non-Aryans on a whim.

[Jvig43]

Originally Posted by mqtirishfan

I think that Sartre's thoughts on freedom and responsibility of actions applies well to Heidegger's political leanings. No matter what the consequences of rejecting the Nazis was, he is as responsible for his actions as someone who set out to eradicate the non-Aryans on a whim.

Sartre's ideas on free will is actually what got me into his writings. His no nonsense stance on action is pretty radical but something I think we should try to live by.

[mqtirishfan]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

Sartre's ideas on free will is actually what got me into his writings. His no nonsense stance on action is pretty radical but something I think we should try to live by.

It's really rather interesting, particularly when determining one's moral or ethical philosophy. I'm intrigued by the application of his ideas in regard to such issues as the banality of evil and moral luck. I feel that to some degree, particularly in the case of moral luck, this stance becomes problematic in application. While it's theoretically ideal to live one's life this way and thus appropriate when discussing existentialism, I'm not sure it can be seen through in practice.

[CJSchneider]

Originally Posted by broth223

This is just my guess but the idea of foreknowledge implies a preordained destiny. Free will, on the other hand, implies a possibility of two outcomes. So if the future is predetermined then free will can't exist.

Isiah 55:9
The human mind can not grasp the complete concept of eternity as well as pre-knowledge not meaning predetermination.