de·ter·min·ism (d¹-tûr“m…-n¹z”…m) n. The philosophical doctrine that every event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedents that are independent of the human will.

Since gaining interest in philosophy and its relationship to theology, I've believed that determinism is largely wrong, ethically and logically.  Now I'm not so sure.

Assuming the orthodox position that Adam and Eve lived in the garden in a state of perfection, I can think of nothing 'wrong' with the idea of a created deterministic universe in which every thought, material action/reaction was only perfect.  Here, every movement would naturally be only toward good things.  The idea that the natural disposition of every movement, physical or mental, being only toward perfection seems is logically compatible with the notion of determinism.  If every movement was employed only to its greatest good, why would (or could) one wish to will otherwise?

The only thing I can think of as missing from this equation of perfection of  knowledge would be the absence of understanding of the consequences of choosing imperfectly.  Hence, eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil [e.g., making a single wrong or imperfect choice], might be the only actually "free" choice a perfect human could make.  Not only this, but in order for Adam's knowledge to be complete, he would almost have had to disobeyed God.  How could you explain to a perfect human being what imperfection is like?  Wouldn't this be like trying to explain color to one blind from birth?  If every choice was only and always directed to good, how could the perfect mind have any knowledge that imperfect choice brought imperfect results, that there other consquences  outside of those found in perfect choosing?  Under the conditions of perfection, wouldn't it be a necessity for Adam to have eaten the fruit so as to even learn what free choice means?

For the reasons above, it seems to me a deterministic universe, if that universe existed in perfection, would not only not be a bad thing, it'd be the only logically coherent form a perfect existence could operate in.

Other thoughts?

Hello Jimmy,

Thanks for responding.
First, the idea of perfection in the garden is, as noted in the OP, prettty orthodox.  It's not a new idea.  Second, it follows that anyone who exists in a non-perfect universe would of necessity have to "impose his own idea of what a universe existing in perfection means'.  The statement begs a point.

I've heard this view before.  The case that the universe currently exists in perfection, depending on what you mean (e.g., if you include as "perfect" all modes of human behavior for example) is probably going to be problematic.

  Perhaps.  On the other hand, there are a number of materialists who assure us with supreme confidence that mental states are pretty much proven now to be physical states, though on reviewing the evidence, this seems far from true.

If you can summarize how quantum physics blows the idea of determinism apart, I'd be interested in hearing how this is so.

Hi Jimmy,

Thanks for sharing your opinions.

I understand, but am a bit puzzled by your participation.  I assumed that the the op was arranged in such a way as to invite like-minded Christians interested in exploring connections between certain orthodox theological tenets from a philosophical standpoint.  You've made it clear that you wholly reject the framework of the OP, which is fine....but leaves me wondering what you hope to gain by repeated rejection of the premises.