Anselm notes that free choice and foreknowledge seem to be incompatible (repugnare), for whatever God has foreknowledge of, it seems must be necessarily be the case, whereas what happens through free choice happen without any necessity. Free choice also seems incompatible with predestination. For predestination is God's preordination (praeordinatio) or predetermination (praestitutio). But what God has determined to be in the future, it seems will necessarily be the case. And if he predestines only good outcomes, then only good outcomes occur of necessity, and there is free choice only for evil outcomes, which is absurd. In this way, Hume's remarks suggest that traditional “metaphysical” theories of causation have encouraged a fundamental confusion between the notion of an event being caused and that of an event being compelled. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-freewill/#HumNewLigNecWitFor Lecture 7: Free Will by Millican [url to follow]
Medieval Theories of Future Contingents http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-futcont Simo Knuuttila http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/free-will-foreknowledge/ http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/future-contingents/ http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/modality-medieval/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_free_will (yet another Wikipedia argument) The article doesn't mention Cicero http://people.wku.edu/jan.garrett/stoa/seddon1.htm mentions Cicero https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Evjb7LIrgCAC&pg=PA8 on 'whether you go to the doctor or not' fatalism – the doctrine that it is pointless to act (the lazy argument) https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-kHmBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA23 is useful on the lazy argument and on the problem of evil and free choice. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazy_argument P.4 "the possibility that an individual could have done otherwise