Boethius provided different solutions to challenges of human freedom versus divine foreknowledge after Augustine. Such resolution appealed to the aspects of time and God’s eternity. Boethius concluded such a decision through his imaginations of Lady Philosophy as he waited for his execution (129). For example, Boethius is convinced that ‘nothing comes from nothing’ while he interrogated himself about the possibility of an event transpiring indeterministic or randomly. In his view, Boethius indicated that a purely random event tends to lack cause since it develops from nothing, making it impossible. Even though people always refer to some occurrences as random or chance, it is improper to reach that conclusion. For instance, if a farmer discovers buried gold while digging, the event does not appear truly random because someone, probably a thief, must have hurriedly hidden it and was captured before recovery (Leftow 36). Therefore, Boethius demonstrated that individuals consider ‘random’ events as something unintended, unforeseen, or unexpected.
Moreover, given that a true chance does not exist and every event is subject to a set of causation, people tend to question whether they are free. For instance, by finding gold in the field, the farmer seems to be captured in the inevitable interwoven causes (Laing 28). Boethius questioned if there is freedom of human independent judgment, or whether people are also chained by fate. From Lady Philosophy, everyone enjoys freedom since they demonstrate reasoning abilities, unlike physical objects that are left with no choice in falling (Glasscock 43). Humans can make judgments and conclude things that are better or worse than others. In such contemplations, Boethius showed that people are free to seek superior options and avoid the inferior ones (132). Because humans have free will, it is important to determine how compatible freedom is with divine foreknowledge. However, by remembering that everything an individual engages in is necessary, free will becomes impossible (Fergusson 89). Such consideration is supported by the spiritual argument that God knows everything that happens even before they occur.
Augustine urged that no problem exists since the path followed by necessity does not seem to endanger free will. According to Augustine, the conceivable directions for necessitation are God’s knowledge of human choice and vice-versa. (Flint 29) The first path ensures that free will is removed because if a person will do a particular thing tomorrow, then their action allows God to know it. However, Boethius rejected the solution questioning if foreknowledge of future things was the cause of necessitation, or if its necessity prompted the cause of foreseeability (130). Boethius felt it was blasphemous to believe that humans could enable the eternal, unchanging God to acknowledge things (Florio et al. 56). He went further to assert that it was wrong to claim that temporal things could trigger eternal knowledge.
Through his arguments, Boethius has convinced the path of causation was not appropriate since it encompassed necessitation that jeopardizes human freedom. Boethius considered foreknowledge to be a symbol of the occurrence of future things even if it did not produce their necessity (137). If knowledge about something that might happen does not cause it to occur, it will have to happen, or the ‘knowledge’ will cease. Boethius believed that there was no room for foreknowledge if necessity lacks. When people are free, the future appears indefinite, though knowledge is naturally definite, sure, and certain. In such a case, a person cannot determine if something will happen unless it occurs definitely. On the other hand, hopeless outcomes indicate that there is no free will and the notion of vice and virtues lack meaning because they have no force (Elwood 17). Therefore, two options exist in foreknowledge, that is, the future is not definite and God is knowledgeable about it.
Boethius’ argument seems to disagree with Lady Philosophy since he believes that if a person knows that something will occur, then it will necessarily happen. Even though no problem exists in having definite knowledge, the present reveals something is happening definitely. The Lady Philosophy asserted that humans should recall the hierarchy of perception; understanding, reason, imagination, and sensation (Baird 22). Each of the four elements demonstrates unique attribution to the present and future. For example, people can reason, imagine, and sense, yet they cannot grasp ‘understanding’ since it is above them.
God’s eternity is elaborated by Lady as being present at all times without coming to being or dying. Eternal things are present at all times because there is nothing that used to be or is yet to happen (Boethius 136). In such a description, God does not foreknow anything instead he sees what is going to happen to people. Humans have a future since they are not eternal, while God perceives forthcoming events as present (Marenbon 121). Therefore, with God’s foreknowledge, the future event will happen definitely since they are present from his perspective. Moreover, what God foresees will eventually occur since they become a necessity, and they cannot happen before they come into the present.
Works Cited
Baird, F. Philosophic classics: From Plato to derrida. Routledge, 2016.
Boethius. “Book V. Free will and God’s foreknowledge.” The consolation of philosophy of Boethius, 1897, pp. 128-137.
Elwood, M. Critical appraisal of epidemiological studies and clinical trials. Oxford University Press, 2017.
Fergusson, David. The Providence of God: A Polyphonic Approach. Cambridge UP, 2018.
Flint, Thomas P. Divine Providence: The Molinist Account. Cornell UP, 2018.
Florio, Ciro D., and Aldo Frigerio. Divine Omniscience and Human Free Will: A Logical and Metaphysical Analysis. Springer Nature, 2019.
Glasscock, A. “A consistent consolation.” Stance: an international undergraduate philosophy journal, vol. 2, no. 1, 2019, pp. 42-48
Laing, John D. Middle Knowledge: Human Freedom in Divine Sovereignty. Kregel Academic, 2018.
Leftow, Brian. Time and Eternity. Cornell UP, 2018.
Marenbon, J. Medieval philosophy. Oxford University Press, 2016.