Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site fortune.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!fortune!polard
From: polard@fortune.UUCP (Henry Polard)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Omniscience and Freedom
Message-ID: <4424@fortune.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 5-Oct-84 17:04:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: fortune.4424
Posted: Fri Oct  5 17:04:25 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 6-Oct-84 05:25:02 EDT
References: <379@wucs.UUCP> <423@hou2a.UUCP>
Reply-To: polard@fortune.UUCP (Henry )
Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA
Lines: 45
Keywords: Omniscience God
Summary: Our concepts don't dictate the nature of beings.y

In article <423@hou2a.UUCP> 54375rr@hou2a.UUCP (R.RENNINGER) writes:
>There can be no time at which an omniscient being makes a
>decision,  because otherwise previously he would not know what
>his future action would be.
>For those who would answer that God operates "outside of
>time," I reply that the idea of a "consciousness"
>that doesn't operate in a causal sequence is simply
>unrelated to anything I associate with consciousness.
>If God's mind operates in some kind of "meta-time," then the
>paradox is unresolved; it just retreats to another realm.
>On the other hand, if His mind is unchangeing, I don't see how
>to justify calling It a "mind" at all.  Consciousness to me
>is inextricably caught up in the idea of continual new
>reactions to the world or at least in reminiscences about past
>knowledge considered in a new light.  The idea of a mind
>without any mental activity needs some justification, to say
>the least.
>
>				Bob Renninger
>				hou2a!54375rr

Sir:

  You seem to think that _your_ beliefs have somethng to do with the
nature of God.  If He "exists", so to speak, what He is like 
may well have nothing to do with how you and I finally decide
on how to use words like "mind" and "consciousness".
With respect to God or any other superior being or force or 
whatever, we are like the  proverbial seven blind blind men 
and the elephant.  Anything we say is impure speculation.
They or it or Him will do whatever they or it or He 
damn well pleases.  If we think it is contradictory or impossible or
generally un-God-like, that's _our_ problem.

We can't accurately define people, including ourselves,
since just about everyone does something unpredictable at least once.
How can we then hope to define a supeior being with
certainty? 

		Yours for a universe filled with surprises.
-- 
Henry Polard (You bring the flames - I'll bring the marshmallows.)
{ihnp4,cbosgd,amd}!fortune!polard
N.B: The words in this posting do not necessarily express the opinions
of me, my employer, or any AI project.