Blame the designer and not the product: God and the lame Free Will argument

by Terry 140 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Terry
    Terry

    Terry, straying away from the Free Will subject for a moment - do you have his "World of Carbon" and "World of Nitrogen"? I had them when I was a kid and have never been able to find them again - I would like to read them again. I just finished "Asimov on Physics".

    I think I like Asimovs real science books as much or more than his science fiction.

    I believe I do have those.

    I love Asimov's histories and the science books.

    His sci-fi has interesting ideas, but, oddly is almost entirely bereft of "action."

  • tec
    tec

    First, I would like to say that you did not answer the question about the Stepford wife, Terry. You deflected the question.

    You personally - with no other influences - would you want to have a stepford wife (and you can even add to her programming that she be happy serving your every need) - or would you want to have a real woman who might let you down?

    Which one would you want?

    There is no difference between a robot programmed to obey and man with Free Will who is forced by God's threat of death who knuckles under
    and obeys. The Freedom to NOT be Free is no freedom at all!

    Everyone dies. The good, the bad, and everyone in between. You have the freedom to do whatever you want in this life, however you choose to do it (within the paramaters of the laws/consequences of the society you live within, of course)

    Now if you use your free will to take away someone else's, or if you use your free will to hurt others... then do not be surprised that you are not invited to carry that on into a possible afterlife. But as for this life, the one you live right now, you live and die the same as anyone else.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • N.drew
    N.drew

    I think I might like a Stepford husband. Do they ever come in the male variety?

  • Terry
    Terry

    First, I would like to say that you did not answer the question about the Stepford wife, Terry. You deflected the question.

    You personally - with no other influences - would you want to have a stepford wife (and you can even add to her programming that she be happy serving your every need) - or would you want to have a real woman who might let you down?

    Which one would you want?

    It is very telling, Tammy, that you focus on "serving every need" as the criteria of accepting the programmed cyborg and yet

    switch the criteria for the "normal" wife to that of "failure" (presumably to serve my every need). The Topic is about Blaming the Designer and not the Product. So, we should focus on the Stepford Wife as the "Product" of programming by a designer shouldn't we?

    The Stepford Wife cannot fail. Fail who, we might ask? Fail the DESIGNER'S PROGRAM! Not, fail me.

    Don't you get it? The Human Wife only has the ability to fail BECAUSE of her designer: GOD.

    False Dichotomy

    The fallacy of false dichotomy is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the 'only other option' is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion must be embraced.

  • FaithfulBrother
    FaithfulBrother

    False Dichotomy

    The fallacy of false dichotomy is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the 'only other option' is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion must be embraced.

    Your assertion that the Creator or designer of human beings failed because at this point in time, his creations have failed miserably by their use of free will is a great example of false dichotomy. If you leave room for another variablebesides one of only two options, that is, that it has still not been proven that if although humans were created with free will, yet they chose to willingly use that free will for things which they were warned against and were told what the outcome of their actions would be, that they might just in fact learn a lesson "the hard way" so that instead of being true "robots" they would have real knowledge of what it is like to go against these warnings. If people were allowed to live for eternity, the short 80 year lifespan in which they were able to experiment and learn through experience why these free choices they made led to death and suffering would seem like a blink of an eye to someone who is living forever and ever.

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety
    I believe I do have those.
    I love Asimov's histories and the science books.

    Pleased let me know if you are ever interested in selling any of those, Terry. Particularly the nonfiction science/history popularizations (or collections of essays on these subjects). Some of the older ones are hard to find. I recently got my hands on a 50 year old Asimov paperback on chemistry (A Short History of Chemistry) to add to my library.

  • tec
    tec

    It is very telling, Tammy, that you focus on "serving every need" as the criteria of accepting the programmed cyborg and yet
    switch the criteria for the "normal" wife to that of "failure" (presumably to serve my every need).

    Well then, change 'serve every need' to doing everything that you say is good, and doing nothing that you say is bad.

    The criteria is that a woman with free will could let you down and choose to go another way other than what you say is right. A stepford wife would not be able to do that, she is programmed only with the ability to do things that you say are good or right.

    So which would you prefer?

    The fallacy of false dichotomy is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the 'only other option' is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion

    must be embraced.

    I am just asking which of those two women you would prefer. The discussion does not have to end at that point; it could in fact be a starting point of the discussion.

    For instance... " I would want the real woman because (insert reason)... but... I would not threaten to kill her if she chose to leave me, because that is not really free will."

    Then I could respond to that.

    peace,

    tammy

  • FaithfulBrother
    FaithfulBrother

    Out of curiosity, I would like to get your input:

    There are several scenarios that I would like you to choose from, and I would like you to choose the one that would genuinely create the most happiness for you.

    1. Assume that there is no God or creator of the universe. We just happen to exist out of chance, given that the universe does exist, but we somehow managed to evolve randomly out of some primordial slime. And so here we are today with the intellectual capacity to debate the origin of our existence. It doesn't really matter though, because we are just a bunch of animals that happened to evolve from a universe that we don't know why exists in the first place.

    2. Assume we were created by God, a spirit that is greater than ourselves and designed us, but we have no free will. We are essentially robots, and the only thing we can do is what we were programmed to do. If we feel good, it's because we were programmed to feel this way. If we decide to do anything, it's because we were programmed to do it.

    3. Assume that we were created by God, a spirit who is greater than us, but he decided to create us in his own image by giving us free will to choose what we do, just like him. Now, being greater, more intelligent and wise than us, he knew that if we chose to do certain things, we would create different consequences for ourselves and others that those actions affected. But he allowed us to do these things if we so chose. Of course, what loving person would not warn you of the consequences of your actions if they knew beforehand what would happen if you chose to do something harmful to yourself or others? But what if this creator allowed us to go ahead and do whatever we wanted, indulging in our selfish lusts and pleasures, making ourselves feel good temporarily through our own wants and decisions, only to find out by the end of our life that what we chose for ourselves was clearly not the best decisions we could have made? In fact, this creator of ours loved us so much that he not only allowed us to do whatever we wanted during our lifetime, but in order to make up for all the mistakes we made, he allowed his first-born creation that he had grown to love for longer than anyone else or anything in existence, for that matter, to suffer and die in exchange for our lives. The only one besides himself that was able to have free will and at the same time be subjected to the temptations to use that free will, especially in a fleshly body, for their own self indulgence was his very first creation who had witnessed the rest of creation in its making and was able to see how great of a gift life and free will was. So because of all of this, you are able to live a human life and experience first-hand the selfish desires and pleasures that free will can bring you. You can use your free will to do whatever you want, whether it be pleasing only yourself or helping the rest of your family, who are really the entire human race, to use their free will for good and actually be truly happy for eternity.

    Which one of these scenarios would make you the happiest? Of course, these are only hypothetical scenarios in which I am curious to know your choice. I am not saying that all explanations of free will are limited to these three scenarios.

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    How could anyone make such a choice when the options are so biased. Option one has far more advantages than you are admitting to.

  • FaithfulBrother
    FaithfulBrother

    Really? And what advantages are those?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit