Prometheus 6

Omniscience, Omnipotence and Free Will

Heavy title. And it was going to be a heavy essay, but I decided short and sweet is better.

The reason people think there is a conflict between the concepts on either side of the "and" is

• We've had a far less complete understanding of physical reality than we have now
• Common sense and common knowledge lags behind physics by at least a century

A theory is useful to the degree that it has predictive power and the most useful physical theory to date is quantum mechanics. Yet quantum mechanics does not make exact predictions. Instead it makes statements of probability. Our experience, however, is only of specific states and therefore our common sense speaks only to specific states.

Our common sense leads us to assume the nature of omniscience (which we do not, and likely will not ever, experience directly) is to have definitive knowledge of the singular, specific, past present and future state of all things. This, of course, conflicts with our experience of free will, which agrees with quantum mechanics in its assumption of the indeterminate nature of the future. Our direct experience is that the state of the future is determined by decisions made now. So it seems the choice is to give up the concept of omniscience, free will or take one or both as a matter of faith.

But suppose omniscience isn't the definitive knowledge of the singular, specific, past present and future state of all things. Suppose omniscience is perfect knowledge of all possibilities and the odds of, and means required for, the manifestation of each possibility. Suppose omniscience is the possession of all existing knowledge, all possible knowledge, rather than some state of knowledge that we, in our ignorance may imagine.

This allows the coexistence of omniscience and free will and doesn't actually change the definition of either term. It merely changes our understanding of them in light of the knowledge of physics we now possess. This level of knowledge would allow absolute control of all physical events through the application of extraordinarily little force. Omnipotence of a sort would be almost a side effect of omniscience.

But the total definition of omnipotence is usually denied by such empty challenges as "can God make a stone so heavy He cannot lift it," not realizing the definition of omnipotence does not require its possessor (assuming there is one) to do anything more than possess all the power that exists, to be unsurpassable. The challenge, again, is one extrapolated from the ignorance known as "common knowledge."

posted by Prometheus 6 at 8/3/2003 09:22:38 PM |