Since Women Were "Liberated"

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:43 pm Determinism is more that causal chains that necessitate one event preceding or succeeding another event. Determinism is also all events past and future are necessary events that can't be otherwise than they are, were, or will be.
If that's how things are, then doing anything at all is not wrong. That includes marginalizing, suppressing or harming women. All those actions were also "determined" to happen, and the perps who did them "couldn't be otherwise than they were," and "couldn't do otherwise than they actually did."

So I have to assume you're not a Determinist. If you were, you'd have no grounds for complaining about anything that ever happened to women. Que sera, sera.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 13394
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by henry quirk »

Mannie,

okay, look: I never said nuthin' about foreknowledge causing, so you can stop explaining it

I say: foreknowledge means the script is set, the events are concrete in advance

if He knows what I'll do tomorrow, then tomorrow is determined, not cuz He knows: he knows only cuz it's set, cuz there's sumthin' in place for Him to know

since I know, as fact, I'm a free will, and know, as fact, there's a Creator: I surmise He knows all about every soulless thing in existence, thru-out the whole of Reality, but there are at least 7 billion plus ensouled things He can only guess at and hope for

That has other unpalatable consequences

not for me

It would mean that God cannot prophesy anything,

no, it only means man is a wildcard: He can know a fire will eat thru my town tomorrow; what He can't do is know what men will do in the face of that fire

it means that things can happen that take Him unawares

human things, yes

what's our level of trust in Him?

see, you're givin' me a christian perspective: I'm not christian (not yet), so I'm not inclined (yet) to substitute that perspective for my own

it's a brain-bender

not really
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 7:35 pm if He knows what I'll do tomorrow, then tomorrow is determined, not cuz He knows: he knows only cuz it's set, cuz there's sumthin' in place for Him to know
To say that God knows what will happen is only to say He knows what will happen no matter what it is. It is to say that He knows all possible routes your free will can take, along with which of the routes you will select. But that has no effect on your ability to select. He may see the whole "web" of possibilities at once; that does not change the fact that you, the individual, stand at a crossroads and have a decision to make -- one you will make not because of how God foreknows it, but because of how you want it to be.

The Bible says that God not only knows the outcomes that DO happen, but also every possibility of what would have happened if you chose differently. We know He knows these things, because He actually says what they are. However, if there were actually only ever one possibility, then God could not know alternate possibilities. That He does, and we know He does, shows that life is not predetermined or fated to one course.
what's our level of trust in Him?

see, you're givin' me a christian perspective: I'm not christian (not yet), so I'm not inclined (yet) to substitute that perspective for my own
No, I understand your suppositions, Henry. I'm not asking you to be other than you are.

I'm just pointing out that not only you, but everybody else as well, would have no reason to trust a God of the sort you describe. How can one trust in such a fallible, surprisable, forward-blind kind of Creator? What is the worth of any salvation that such a Being would offer?

Did you check the video? It's short, only about three minutes, and worth it, I think.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 13394
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by henry quirk »

Mannie,

if you'd just written...

He knows all possible routes your free will can take

...I could agree, but you continue with...

along with which of the routes you will select

...and killed free will

👎

further, you say...

I understand your suppositions, Henry.

...but then say...

I'm just pointing out that not only you, but everybody else as well, would have no reason to trust a God of the sort you describe. How can one trust in such a fallible, surprisable, forward-blind kind of Creator? What is the worth of any salvation that such a Being would offer?

if you got my overall position, you'd understand trust (not as you mean it) and salvation don't figure into it

the annoyin' part...

everybody else as well

...means you ain't really talkin' to me at all

always sellin', right?

👎
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:28 pm
the annoyin' part...

everybody else as well

...means you ain't really talkin' to me at all

always sellin', right?

👎
No, actually. I was trying to say it nicely.

I was pointing out that not just you would have no reason to trust such a god, but I wouldn't either. Nobody would. For such a god would not be omniscient, not in control of my situation, and subject to mistakes and blindnesses. How could you or I -- or anybody, name whomever you will -- believe in the trustworthiness of such an erring, confused god?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 13394
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by henry quirk »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:40 pm
henry quirk wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:28 pm
the annoyin' part...

everybody else as well

...means you ain't really talkin' to me at all

always sellin', right?

👎
No, actually. I was trying to say it nicely.

I was pointing out that not just you would have no reason to trust such a god, but I wouldn't either. Nobody would. For such a god would not be omniscient, not in control of my situation, and subject to mistakes and blindnesses. How could you or I -- or anybody, name whomever you will -- believe in the trustworthiness of such an erring, confused god?
yeah, you already know my answer
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

henry quirk wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:15 am yeah, you already know my answer
Okay; but no "selling."

I was just being as willing to admit the implications to myself as I was to point them out to you. That's all.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 13394
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by henry quirk »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:25 am
henry quirk wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:15 am yeah, you already know my answer
Okay; *but no "selling."

I was just being as willing to admit the implications to myself as I was to point them out to you. That's all.
*🤔
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

henry quirk wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:48 am *🤔
Well, what qualifies to you as "selling"? Does believing something and advocating for it count?

Then guilty as charged, your honour. But I won't be quitting, either. I'm a Christian, and Christians talk about their faith. It's part of their direct commission.

However, my intent at the moment, in my previous message, was only to be gracious in including myself with my comment to you; because it would be true of us both. Neither of us has good reason to put any confidence in a god who can't know the future and can be "surprised" by what we do. Such a one could not even securely tell us what his attitude to our future actions will be.

But we can leave it at that.
Belinda
Posts: 6411
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Belinda »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 6:15 pm
Belinda wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:43 pm Determinism is more that causal chains that necessitate one event preceding or succeeding another event. Determinism is also all events past and future are necessary events that can't be otherwise than they are, were, or will be.
If that's how things are, then doing anything at all is not wrong. That includes marginalizing, suppressing or harming women. All those actions were also "determined" to happen, and the perps who did them "couldn't be otherwise than they were," and "couldn't do otherwise than they actually did."

So I have to assume you're not a Determinist. If you were, you'd have no grounds for complaining about anything that ever happened to women. Que sera, sera.
What you say would be the case if we knew the future. But we don't, and therein lies our freedom.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 2:26 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 6:15 pm
Belinda wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:43 pm Determinism is more that causal chains that necessitate one event preceding or succeeding another event. Determinism is also all events past and future are necessary events that can't be otherwise than they are, were, or will be.
If that's how things are, then doing anything at all is not wrong. That includes marginalizing, suppressing or harming women. All those actions were also "determined" to happen, and the perps who did them "couldn't be otherwise than they were," and "couldn't do otherwise than they actually did."

So I have to assume you're not a Determinist. If you were, you'd have no grounds for complaining about anything that ever happened to women. Que sera, sera.
What you say would be the case if we knew the future. But we don't, and therein lies our freedom.
It doesn't matter a whit what we know or don't know. That only speaks to the question of whether or not we realize we are in a Predetermined universe; it does not get us out of such a universe. If the universe is predetermined, then absuing or marginalizing women is simply not wrong. It's nobody's "fault," because (whether we realize it or not) the abusers could not do anything but what they did. They, like the victims, were helpless pawns of Fate, and cannot be blamed. Besides, what they did was not, then, intrinsically wrong at all; it was just how Fate made things go.

In fact, one might well argue that there is a terrible injustice being perpetrated by the victims who blame their abusers; after all, the abusers had not choice. It was Fate's fault, and Fate alone is to blame. (Well, except there IS no such thing as any "injustice" in a fated universe, either way.)

All the abused, marginalized or suppressed woman can say is, "Fate suppressed/abused/marginalized me. It's just how it was." There is no grounds for, or possibility of appeal for anything else. And if she succeeded in throwing off her shackles, she's no longer admirable, or heroic...she just got dealt a different Fate, and that's not her achievement at all.

So if you believe in Predetermination, you cannot believe in women's rights, or complain of injustices against women. Fate does what fate does. And our knowledge is irrelevant, incapable of changing that deep truth. In fact, we'd all probably be better (or at least realistic) if we just all accepted that. Those who imagine that their ignorance of Predetermination makes Predetermination untrue are simply fooling themselves.

Can you live in that world?
Belinda
Posts: 6411
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Belinda »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 3:26 pm
Belinda wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 2:26 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 6:15 pm
If that's how things are, then doing anything at all is not wrong. That includes marginalizing, suppressing or harming women. All those actions were also "determined" to happen, and the perps who did them "couldn't be otherwise than they were," and "couldn't do otherwise than they actually did."

So I have to assume you're not a Determinist. If you were, you'd have no grounds for complaining about anything that ever happened to women. Que sera, sera.
What you say would be the case if we knew the future. But we don't, and therein lies our freedom.
It doesn't matter a whit what we know or don't know. That only speaks to the question of whether or not we realize we are in a Predetermined universe; it does not get us out of such a universe. If the universe is predetermined, then absuing or marginalizing women is simply not wrong. It's nobody's "fault," because (whether we realize it or not) the abusers could not do anything but what they did. They, like the victims, were helpless pawns of Fate, and cannot be blamed. Besides, what they did was not, then, intrinsically wrong at all; it was just how Fate made things go.

In fact, one might well argue that there is a terrible injustice being perpetrated by the victims who blame their abusers; after all, the abusers had not choice. It was Fate's fault, and Fate alone is to blame. (Well, except there IS no such thing as any "injustice" in a fated universe, either way.)

All the abused, marginalized or suppressed woman can say is, "Fate suppressed/abused/marginalized me. It's just how it was." There is no grounds for, or possibility of appeal for anything else. And if she succeeded in throwing off her shackles, she's no longer admirable, or heroic...she just got dealt a different Fate, and that's not her achievement at all.

So if you believe in Predetermination, you cannot believe in women's rights, or complain of injustices against women. Fate does what fate does. And our knowledge is irrelevant, incapable of changing that deep truth. In fact, we'd all probably be better (or at least realistic) if we just all accepted that. Those who imagine that their ignorance of Predetermination makes Predetermination untrue are simply fooling themselves.

Can you live in that world?
No, not knowing the future, and trying to find the best way forward is our freedom to change what has been into what will be. You confuse determinism with fatalism.

If this were an inanimate world then determinism would be the same as fatalism, but we are living beings who face the future and have to decide what it will be.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

Belinda wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 10:38 pm You confuse determinism with fatalism.
Fatalism is the existential application of Determinism. Fatalist is what somebody becomes when they believe Determinism is true. That, and amoral, of course.
...we are living beings who face the future and have to decide what it will be.
If Determinism is true, our "decisions" decide nothing at all. Like all things, they are simply fated to be what they are. We may imagine we have free will, but we're just fooling ourselves, in that case.

Having the illusion of free will is not the same has having free will. That's the mistake you're making.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 13394
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by henry quirk »

Mannie,

Neither of us has good reason to put any confidence in a god who can't know the future and can be "surprised" by what we do. Such a one could not even securely tell us what his attitude to our future actions will be.

the good reason: He built us with reason, free will, and conscience...He built us to self-direct, self-rely, and to be self-responsible...He built us to live and thrive without Him...He is Creator, not Caretaker...not His job to change our diapers, wipe away our tears, or give us answers...He built us to wipe our own bums, to buck up and have a spine, and find the objective answers ourselves

and, circlin' back: this Reality cannot tolerate free will and foreknowledge...if man is a free will, then God forsakes His foreknowledge; if God foreknows, there is no free will

again: if God prizes free will -- and seems he does -- then He can't know what I or you or an other person will do: like any of us, He can only guess or predict

But we can leave it at that.

yep
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15193
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Since Women Were "Liberated"

Post by Immanuel Can »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 2:57 am this Reality cannot tolerate free will and foreknowledge...
It can, very easily.

All it requires is that we note the difference between two verbs: "know" and "cause."

But yes, we can leave it.
Post Reply