Daniel dodges a dilemma by substituting his own

[tagriffy]

So, when Satan had 100% knowledge of God in the pre-existence, he no longer had any free agency to rebel?

Keep that one in your back pocket for MG 3.0

If Shades doesn't, I will.

[Philo Sofee]

The other response on God respecting our free agency, and thinking it more important than giving us actual truth and knowledge because that would take away faith is this. Saying God will not give us absolute knowledge is bunk. Consider Joseph Smith refusing to live polygamy, yet the angel with the sword met him and said do it, or I cut your head off kid. Joseph Smith's free agency wasn't respected. at. all. Now, granted, that's giving Joseph the benefit of the doubt about him being truthful about the incident.

[Gadianton]

I generally follow PG's response. This part was interesting:

If one person knows the right thing to do to survive the disaster

Interesting way to put it. The biggest difference in my mind between a prophet and an entrepreneur is the zero-sum element. The business world is dog-eat-dog for sure. But as soon as you've got a prophet on the table, it's literally all or nothing. Prophets may have the same get-rich-quick mindset as a big cryptocurrency influencer -- here's the secret formula or beliefs to get God's favor nobody else knows about -- but they are more about escaping the bottom falling out for everyone else. With the exception of Elon Musk who will save humanity by making us a multi-planet species, most entrepreneurs aren't predicting salvation for their investors and utter doom for everyone else. Nor do they expect absolute life conformity although with MLMs you're moving in that direction.

[Physics Guy]

The comparison between prophets and entrepreneurs is a good one, I think. Because they seem to differ more in degree than in kind, I think it's worth considering both prophets and entrepreneurs as special cases of leaders. The phenomenon of leadership looks most dramatic when the stakes are high.

The toughest decisions to make are those that have both high stakes and high uncertainty. If X is true, then option A is enormously better than option B, but if X is false, then option B is enormously better; and we don't know about X. The advantage of A over B if X is true might be so vast, in fact, that even a small chance of X being true could make A the best choice. If the a priori chance of X being true is small, though, then it can often be hard to make a game theoretical decision with confidence, because small probabilities tend to be unreliable.

Information is always nice to have, but sometimes you need it desperately. That's when you want to hear from a leader.