Jewish Discussion Thread

[EnragedMaldivians]

I never said it was by him. Works with any kind of true precognition really. If precognition is real and through precognition someone knows that someone else will do action x on a given date then there is no way that he will not do action x on that date. It's inevitable that it will happen. Choice is an illusion in that context, since the person will perform action x no matter what. It's already happened before it's happened, in a sense.

If precognition renders choice an illusion, then choice is always an illusion - because right now, I'm looking back at choices I made in my past. I have knowledge about those choices, and yet those choices seemed real and genuine at the time - yet, from the point of view of someone in the past, I am seeing the future, and it has already transpired exactly as I have seen it.

Yes, I believe choice is always an illusion since I don't believe in free will anyway. Omniscience and precognition existing, if they existed would simply be more reasons not to believe in free will, since I believe they are incompatible.

I'm not ignoring your post with the mountains, the cards and the telescope by the way, but I'm going to leave tackling that till the morning, when I'm less exhausted.

But say that an omniscient God knew what my response was going to be, at this very moment, word for word. Would it then be wrong to say that my reply has not only been pre-witnessed but pre-determined? I maintain that the two become the same in this context. I mean would I write anything other than what this omniscient God knows I will write? Aren't I kind of bound to fate?

[Menassa]

Back from prayers... really very interesting.

[Grave_n_idle]

If precognition renders choice an illusion, then choice is always an illusion - because right now, I'm looking back at choices I made in my past. I have knowledge about those choices, and yet those choices seemed real and genuine at the time - yet, from the point of view of someone in the past, I am seeing the future, and it has already transpired exactly as I have seen it.

Yes, I believe choice is always an illusion since I don't believe in free will anyway. Omniscience and precognition existing, if they existed would simply be more reasons not to believe in free will, since I believe they are incompatible.

I'm not ignoring your post with the mountains, the cards and the telescope by the way, but I'm going to leave tackling that till the morning, when I'm less exhausted.

But say that an omniscient God knew what my response was going to be, at this very moment, word for word. Would it then be wrong to say that my reply has not only been pre-witnessed but pre-determined? I maintain that the two become the same in this context. I mean would I write anything other than what this omniscient God knows I will write? Aren't I kind of bound to fate?

Do you believe you 'chose' to make THAT post?

I've seen it, now - I know it existed, and all omniscience does, is grant this knowledge of the past... before it is the past.

[Potlimitomaha]

Menassa, you Israeli, American or other.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Back from prayers... really very interesting.

Is prayer similar in Judaism to prayer in Islam? As in, are there certain prayers you must perform or you will not be let into heaven?

[EnragedMaldivians]

Yes, I believe choice is always an illusion since I don't believe in free will anyway. Omniscience and precognition existing, if they existed would simply be more reasons not to believe in free will, since I believe they are incompatible.

I'm not ignoring your post with the mountains, the cards and the telescope by the way, but I'm going to leave tackling that till the morning, when I'm less exhausted.

But say that an omniscient God knew what my response was going to be, at this very moment, word for word. Would it then be wrong to say that my reply has not only been pre-witnessed but pre-determined? I maintain that the two become the same in this context. I mean would I write anything other than what this omniscient God knows I will write? Aren't I kind of bound to fate?

Do you believe you 'chose' to make THAT post?

I've seen it, now - I know it existed, and all omniscience does, is grant this knowledge of the past... before it is the past.

No. I do not.

[Menassa]

Back from prayers... really very interesting.

Is prayer similar in Judaism to prayer in Islam? As in, are there certain prayers you must perform or you will not be let into heaven?

Well.... no... their are certain prayers that must be preformed.... but not that you won't be allowed into heaven from not preforming them.

Menassa, you Israeli, American or other.

Mericcan.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Grave_n_Idle, do you reject the argument that: if choices are foreseen, then you can't choose any option other than what has been seen - which would mean that free will is an illusion (in that context)? I honestly don't understand how you can deny this.

[Grave_n_idle]

Grave_n_Idle, do you reject the argument that if choices are foreseen, then you can't choose any option other than what has been seen - which would mean that free will is an illusion?

That's a slightly tricky one to answer.

I don't reject the argument that a choice foreseen can't be changed - but I do reject the argument that THAT means it wasn't a choice when it was made.

It's slightly trickier because I don't personally have a hard and fast belief about the nature of 'free will' at all. Either we're just an accumulation of stimuli and responses, or we have choice - and to be honest, I don't think it really matters either way. We BEHAVE as though we had choice, whether that's true or not.

But what I'm discussing here is whether - if 'choice' is real - it is invalidated by omniscience, and I think it's illogical to assume it is. If choice is real, omniscience is just seeing the past before it became the past - it no more invalidates the choice, than you and I discussing what you chose to eat yesterday invalidates your choice.

In other words, the correct way to think of omniscience is that it's seeing things that have already transpired, but earlier than you should be able to see it according to a normal linear understanding of time.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Grave_n_Idle, do you reject the argument that if choices are foreseen, then you can't choose any option other than what has been seen - which would mean that free will is an illusion?

That's a slightly tricky one to answer.

I don't reject the argument that a choice foreseen can't be changed - but I do reject the argument that THAT means it wasn't a choice when it was made.

It's slightly trickier because I don't personally have a hard and fast belief about the nature of 'free will' at all. Either we're just an accumulation of stimuli and responses, or we have choice - and to be honest, I don't think it really matters either way. We BEHAVE as though we had choice, whether that's true or not.

But what I'm discussing here is whether - if 'choice' is real - it is invalidated by omniscience, and I think it's illogical to assume it is. If choice is real, omniscience is just seeing the past before it became the past - it no more invalidates the choice, than you and I discussing what you chose to eat yesterday invalidates your choice.

In other words, the correct way to think of omniscience is that it's seeing things that have already transpired, but earlier than you should be able to see it according to a normal linear understanding of time.

Well, I was, with slight amendments, quoting something that you yourself said about free will that I happened to agree with:

viewtopic.php?p=9105272

Sorry, it wasn't meant to be a gotcha moment (well, okay, a little bit ) but I'm genuinely quite surprised by your position on the issue. If I'm not mistaken (I might very well be, it's quite late) I take it you've had a slight change of views?

In any event I'm not sure I agree with your comparison of omniscience with seeing the past (after it's become the past) but I'm going to leave it for now since I need to sleep.

[Vazdania]

Then he knows if it will rain today, with 100% certainity. If he does, then it is foreordained that it will or will not rain today. If he doesn't, he's no better than the weatherman, and I may as well set up an altar to channel five.

My friend again placing god together with human knowledge is an anthropomorphism.

I know this is a tired answer and can be a bit of a dochek a stretch but still none the less.

Can a small child understand Metaphysics?

Did someone say.....Metaphysics???

[Nazi Flower Power]

No matter how much Nazi propaganda I read, I still don't understand why Hitler thought those were a good idea.

because in his heart, he believed he was doing the world a favor, and couldnt understand how anyone could feel different. Anti-semitism, even in the world today, runs deep.

I know. I've met antisemites, but I just don't get why. There are some kinds of racism where I can see how it's problematic, but I can also see where people are getting their ideas. The "kill the Jews" thing, I don't know where people get that.

And I'm honestly not sure how much Hitler really thought he was doing the world a favor. I think he was more concerned with impressing people and proving his alleged superiority than with actually making the world a better place. He could be really self-absorbed.

[Menassa]

because in his heart, he believed he was doing the world a favor, and couldnt understand how anyone could feel different. Anti-semitism, even in the world today, runs deep.

I know. I've met antisemites, but I just don't get why. There are some kinds of racism where I can see how it's problematic, but I can also see where people are getting their ideas. The "kill the Jews" thing, I don't know where people get that.

And I'm honestly not sure how much Hitler really thought he was doing the world a favor. I think he was more concerned with impressing people and proving his alleged superiority than with actually making the world a better place. He could be really self-absorbed.

Essentially I believe it stems from the ideology that no one can out rightly deny god..... only the devil or Satan can do that.

Which are the only people who saw God and rejected him? The Jews..... what happened shortly after? Their Temple was destroyed and they were exiled across the planet..... they shall be a witness people to those who reject the Father and His Son...... and how do you properly punish the Devil??

Years and years of persecution..... hate.... and baby slaughter.

I believe that this is true more than: "We're clannish," or "We are more successful than they are."

[Grave_n_idle]

That's a slightly tricky one to answer.

I don't reject the argument that a choice foreseen can't be changed - but I do reject the argument that THAT means it wasn't a choice when it was made.

It's slightly trickier because I don't personally have a hard and fast belief about the nature of 'free will' at all. Either we're just an accumulation of stimuli and responses, or we have choice - and to be honest, I don't think it really matters either way. We BEHAVE as though we had choice, whether that's true or not.

But what I'm discussing here is whether - if 'choice' is real - it is invalidated by omniscience, and I think it's illogical to assume it is. If choice is real, omniscience is just seeing the past before it became the past - it no more invalidates the choice, than you and I discussing what you chose to eat yesterday invalidates your choice.

In other words, the correct way to think of omniscience is that it's seeing things that have already transpired, but earlier than you should be able to see it according to a normal linear understanding of time.

Well, I was, with slight amendments, quoting something that you yourself said about free will that I happened to agree with:

viewtopic.php?p=9105272

Sorry, it wasn't meant to be a gotcha moment (well, okay, a little bit ) but I'm genuinely quite surprised by your position on the issue. If I'm not mistaken (I might very well be, it's quite late) I take it you've had a slight change of views?

In any event I'm not sure I agree with your comparison of omniscience with seeing the past (after it's become the past) but I'm going to leave it for now since I need to sleep.

It's contextual. In the other thread I'm explaining the logic of an argument someone else made, to a third party.

It's a confusing arena, and that's somewhat my own fault because I'm not always presenting arguments I necessarily believe - for example, in a thread a while back I was discussing salvation by grace, versus works. In that instance, I was explaining the logic of salvation by grace, and it's scriptural support - but I suspect most people know I've been an atheist for a quarter of a century, so I don't actually believe either.

In this particular topic - I tend to lean towards the idea that 'free will' is something of an illusion, because I tend to lean towards the idea that we are basically extremely complex machines reacting to extremely complex stimuli - but it ultimately doesn't matter because the extremely complex reactions would be indistinguishable from 'choice'.

But if you're going to accept the premise of 'choice', the simple presence of omniscience (or just prescience) doesn't automatically invalidate it because omniscience remembering things that happened in your past doesn't automatically invalidate 'choice', and prescience can be argued to be nothing more than the ability to see things that haven't happened, as though they have.

Perhaps my perspective on that has changed, I'm not sure. Omniscience and prescience require that we consider the observation of time to no longer be strictly linear, but that we still consider the existence of time to be linear, and moving from cause-to-effect. i.e. if prescience (or omniscience) is real - then every action already exists to be witnessed, every choice already has been made from the 'effect' end of the line - but our little bubble is still moving through it, and even though people ten years from now will know that decision - and theoretically, already do - our 'choice' is still being made WITHIN this bubble.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I know. I've met antisemites, but I just don't get why. There are some kinds of racism where I can see how it's problematic, but I can also see where people are getting their ideas. The "kill the Jews" thing, I don't know where people get that.

And I'm honestly not sure how much Hitler really thought he was doing the world a favor. I think he was more concerned with impressing people and proving his alleged superiority than with actually making the world a better place. He could be really self-absorbed.

Essentially I believe it stems from the ideology that no one can out rightly deny god..... only the devil or Satan can do that.

Which are the only people who saw God and rejected him? The Jews..... what happened shortly after? Their Temple was destroyed and they were exiled across the planet..... they shall be a witness people to those who reject the Father and His Son...... and how do you properly punish the Devil??

Years and years of persecution..... hate.... and baby slaughter.

I believe that this is true more than: "We're clannish," or "We are more successful than they are."

I guess since I am not Christian, it is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that people take that shit so seriously. I don't get how someone can meet a nice Jew, and still believe that blood libel shit above their own firsthand experience.

[Evraim]

I guess since I am not Christian, it is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that people take that shit so seriously. I don't get how someone can meet a nice Jew, and still believe that blood libel shit above their own firsthand experience.

In my experience, alot of anti-Semites do not hate specific Jews but rather despise the Jewish people as a whole. The tendency is to say that "she's (or he's) an exception, a decent Jew".

[Menassa]

I guess since I am not Christian, it is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that people take that shit so seriously. I don't get how someone can meet a nice Jew, and still believe that blood libel shit above their own firsthand experience.

In my experience, alot of anti-Semites do not hate specific Jews but rather despise the Jewish people as a whole. The tendency is to say that "she's (or he's) an exception, a decent Jew".

No True Hebrew?

[Evraim]

In my experience, alot of anti-Semites do not hate specific Jews but rather despise the Jewish people as a whole. The tendency is to say that "she's (or he's) an exception, a decent Jew".

No True Hebrew?

Oui. New fallacy.

[Menassa]

No True Hebrew?

Oui. New fallacy.

Mazal Toph!

[Evraim]

Oui. New fallacy.

Mazal Toph!

Mazel tov!

*starts playing klezmer to set the mood*

[Ethel mermania]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=We-KRSy64r4

[Nazi Flower Power]

I guess since I am not Christian, it is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that people take that shit so seriously. I don't get how someone can meet a nice Jew, and still believe that blood libel shit above their own firsthand experience.

In my experience, alot of anti-Semites do not hate specific Jews but rather despise the Jewish people as a whole. The tendency is to say that "she's (or he's) an exception, a decent Jew".

It doesn't really matter though, because their antisemitic asshattery affects everyone. It's not like the SS would come to your door and ask, "You know those Jews next door? Are they part of the conspiracy to ruin Germany or are they good Jews?"

[Evraim]

In my experience, alot of anti-Semites do not hate specific Jews but rather despise the Jewish people as a whole. The tendency is to say that "she's (or he's) an exception, a decent Jew".

It doesn't really matter though, because their antisemitic asshattery affects everyone. It's not like the SS would come to your door and ask, "You know those Jews next door? Are they part of the conspiracy to ruin Germany or are they good Jews?"

True. Even though I have a logical idea of why people hate us (and other people), I'm not certain I'll ever be capable of truly understanding such feelings.

Discussion Question: What is the appropriate response physically and emotionally to anti-Semitism or individual anti-Semites?

[Ethel mermania]

It doesn't really matter though, because their antisemitic asshattery affects everyone. It's not like the SS would come to your door and ask, "You know those Jews next door? Are they part of the conspiracy to ruin Germany or are they good Jews?"

True. Even though I have a logical idea of why people hate us (and other people), I'm not certain I'll ever be capable of truly understanding such feelings.

Discussion Question: What is the appropriate response physically and emotionally to anti-Semitism or individual anti-Semites?

depends on the level of anti semitism.
waspy dont like jews, ignore them
real nazi's (not like the pretend ones here) kill them.

[Menassa]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=We-KRSy64r4

Tell me Ethel... do you celebrate Chanukah?