Friday, 7 July 2017

Why Knowledge is Just Knowledge.

Lets us do a thought experiment. Imagine, if you will you had a pretty sweet computer. Maybe one the size of a couple of solar systems - very powerful, lots of memory. Now, an important figure, say Donald Trump, was in a closed room last week. Imagine we used our computer to simulate everything in the room, down to the last quantum state. Our computer now "knows" everything about the room. Everything is certain.

Now, I don't like Donald Trump. So I log into a console and delete him from the simulated room.

Question time:
Does the real Donald Trump vanish from the room in the past? Why?

Remember, we're absolutely certain about the room, and everything in it. We know precisely and perfectly what will happen in that room for as long as we can run the simulation for.

Now, lets imagine God condescends to help us in our experiment. He comes down and reprograms the computer to show us a similar room, with say, Theresa May in it, this time in the future. I also decide to delete Theresa May. Does Theresa May vanish from the real room? If not why not?

The level of certainty we posses about an event is not causative, so in neither case will a world leader abruptly vanish from a locked room (ah, but for the way knowledge works, we could commit a crime even Sherlock Holmes could not solve!) Absolute certainty about an event does not make the event necessary, else we could manipulate an event by modifying our certainty about it. Knowledge and information are just that, knowledge and information. Nothing magical or mystical about it.

Now, there are two theories about how God's omnipotence and omniscience work. One suggests that God knows because he decrees (read causes), and the other says that God's knowledge is not causative -  He knows all (how, but not what is somewhat mysterious) because he created and sustains the universe. God knows how I will sin tomorrow, not because He caused me to sin (James 1:13), but because I will sin. The source of his knowledge need not be a eternal decree, but can be the event itself.

The common argument by a determinist(or a compatibilist) who does not get the distinction between certainty and necessity is that Arminians face the same conundrum as they do - Arminians affirm God knows the future perfectly -  thus, they think God's certainty about the future renders it necessary. This is an extraordinary claim. As our thought experiment above suggests, knowledge does not operate like this.

I anticipate the objection here - that God's knowledge is not like our (or for that matter our imaginary computer's) knowledge. This is true. But the leap from God's knowledge making all things certain for God, to God's knowledge rendering all things necessary has to be supported, and so far I have not heard a good scriptural(or logical, for that matter) reason for this. It does not come from scripture, it is a philosophical argument, and a rather bad one at that. The burden is on the one who claims that certainty and necessity are always the same thing to prove this. It is an extraordinary claim. And thus we would require some proof  for it. Or at the very least some reasoning, normally it comes out as a pure unsupported assertion.

Feel free to provide yours below, if you have such.

Note, that nowhere here do we deny God's sovereignty, or power. Nothing happens without His knowledge, allowance or plan in it. What we do deny is that God is a causative agent in sin. God certainly is active in creation, causing good things.

As always, I retain the right to decide what comments are posted, and only discussion that is respectful and polite is allowed. Please try to apply the Principle of Charity here.


4 comments:

  1. I agree that the omniscient ability to predict does not imply the ability to control. And it would also be true that the omnipotent ability to control everything may include the ability to choose not to control everything (to grant humans free will). But what about the moral obligation to intervene to prevent a catastrophe, such as someone ending up in eternal torture?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi - I did miss this comment. My apologies. I am not sure why Blogger did not notify me.

      Firstly, it is a a very valid question. The evidential problem of evil is a lot more interesting than the logical one.

      It is a huge topic, and I will give two thoughts on it:
      Firstly, my view of Hell is one where it is not God doing the torture - it is a separation from God. The reason hell is not pleasant is because God is not present there in the same way as he is elsewhere. For one who truly hates God, this is a kinder alternative to heaven where the presence of God would be a far worse torture.

      Secondly, I would affirm God does intervene often, however it is valid to ask why He does not intervene *more*.

      I would suggest there are necessary limitations to what God can do and still achieve his goals - imagine if you will, God facing a very large number of moral dilemmas every minute. Stop the earthquake and condemn a hundred thousand to hell or let it happen and save 50 000? Which one?

      Now, I do get that you may not find this convincing, and I readily admit that it is not a complete answer (there is a lot more to it), but I think it is a starting point.

      Thanks for stopping by!

      Delete
  2. One thing i dont get about this debate is the assumption that things like past,present and future actually mean anything to God in terms of His existence. Bible call God the "I AM", indicating that he transcends time.
    In my View, the idea that God looked forward into the future at creation would point to a time when Gods knowledge was incomplete. Its very difficult to imagine how a Being that transcends time views the universe. The Bible only makes the following clear -
    1. God Knows all things (Past , present ,future)
    2. God interacts with us on real time in a real sense. i.e he responds to our actions/ attitudes/prayers etc.

    As to the time.. Perhaps all of it is the same moment for God and we are playing catch up to him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Ashwin,

      Thanks for stopping by.

      I think the suggestion that God "knows by looking forward" does not, or rather should not come through from my post.

      God doesn't have to "look" to know anything - He after all sustains the very fabric of reality. That doesn't mean that his knowledge is causative though. There is nothing that warrants that God knowing something perfectly or directly implies that He is the sole cause of an event.

      The only question of relevance with "how God knows" is does He know because he meticulously determined, or does He Know because it is truth?

      I hope that clears it up. It isn't that God must learn, it is simply that knowledge is not causative, and there is no rational reason to believe it is.

      Delete