Is there a God? I'm still not sure, Cecil.

[colonial]

Originally Posted by Learjeff

Right -- I doubt anyone here is arguing that fiction is an argument for free will. On the contrary, someone brought it up as an argument *against* free will, which is funny, because if you do ask almost any good novelist, they'll tell you their characters do have wills of their own, and refuse to be cowed into doing what the author wants to serve the plot.

So, it's just funny, not convincing.

The issue was not the existence of free will, it was whether free will
and divine foreknowledge are compatible.

The relationship of authors to the fictional characters they create was
offered as an analogy in support of the compatibilist side of the argument.

[gamerunknown]

Originally Posted by Learjeff

On the contrary, someone brought it up as an argument *against* free will

If you note my usage, it's not comparing an author, it's comparing someone observing a storyboard where the character's entire involvement in the plot has transpired. After observing such a storyboard, the particular storyboard cannot be altered (ignoring Heraclitus' paradox and squabbling about quantity and quality). Except for an omniscient being, all "storyboards" are observable and all actions are as certain as actions occurring in the past are for us.

I cede the possibility of an illogical God. If logic, too, is merely a means of describing this universe, then God could be a square circle.

[Irishman]

Originally Posted by Learjeff

The thing that I find most annoying (and this is a weakness on my part, no doubt) is when others profess absolute certainty. I can understand *feeling* absolutely certain, but there's a big difference between feeling certain and being certain.

If I feel absolutely certain, then I am absolutely certain. There still remains the possibility of being wrong, but I would be certain in my wrongness.

Certainty is a feeling, so there is no difference between feeling certain and being certain.

[John W. Kennedy]

Originally Posted by Learjeff

Right -- I doubt anyone here is arguing that fiction is an argument for free will. On the contrary, someone brought it up as an argument *against* free will, which is funny, because if you do ask almost any good novelist, they'll tell you their characters do have wills of their own, and refuse to be cowed into doing what the author wants to serve the plot.

What I’m saying is that it is an argument against a certain class of arguments against free will—which is not precisely an argument [i]for[i] free will, because it’s only intended as a rebuttal.