If everything was a foregone conclusion, then entropy in the universe would be a constant value, but this would contradict the 2nd law of thermodynamics, according to which entropy is constantly increasing. So no, it's not a foregone conclusion.
An answer that (a) proceeds from the presumption of the questioner's mind, (b) corresponds to the form/wording of the question, and (c) is based on the logic of reasoning “from the opposite”:
If everything (i.e., absolutely everything)were a foregone conclusion, then the question under discussion and the answer(s) to it would be a foregone conclusion, among other things.
If everything defined in paragraph 1 had been (i.e., had already been) decided, then by now (i.e., by the time the question under discussion was formulated) everything that was already decided would have been resolved, i.e., it would have taken place.
The implementation of paragraphs 1-2 would thus mean that by now (i.e., by the time of the question under discussion itself) the question of the evidence for pre-determination itself would be fulfilled in its entirety, i.e., it would receive an exhaustive positive answer(s).
The question under consideration by Vladimir Morin (and the answers to it), which has a specific and finite local-temporal binding (“here and now”), contradicts the idea of a foregone conclusion as “all-realization” and “already-fulfillment” described in paragraphs 1-3, i.e. it refutes this idea of a foregone conclusion, i.e. it proves that “everything is not predetermined”.
If everything was a foregone conclusion, then entropy in the universe would be a constant value, but this would contradict the 2nd law of thermodynamics, according to which entropy is constantly increasing. So no, it's not a foregone conclusion.
An answer that (a) proceeds from the presumption of the questioner's mind, (b) corresponds to the form/wording of the question, and (c) is based on the logic of reasoning “from the opposite”:
If everything (i.e., absolutely everything)were a foregone conclusion, then the question under discussion and the answer(s) to it would be a foregone conclusion, among other things.
If everything defined in paragraph 1 had been (i.e., had already been) decided, then by now (i.e., by the time the question under discussion was formulated) everything that was already decided would have been resolved, i.e., it would have taken place.
The implementation of paragraphs 1-2 would thus mean that by now (i.e., by the time of the question under discussion itself) the question of the evidence for pre-determination itself would be fulfilled in its entirety, i.e., it would receive an exhaustive positive answer(s).
The question under consideration by Vladimir Morin (and the answers to it), which has a specific and finite local-temporal binding (“here and now”), contradicts the idea of a foregone conclusion as “all-realization” and “already-fulfillment” described in paragraphs 1-3, i.e. it refutes this idea of a foregone conclusion, i.e. it proves that “everything is not predetermined”.
Something like that. 🙂 Good luck!