Limited Agency Theory

Latter-day saints should listen to deterministic atheists, because they might have some important ideas about God that we are missing.

(Then again, they might not, since it's pretty much impossible to describe a belief system around what one does not believe. And since atheism is in no way whatsoever any kind of organized belief system, it's hard to make generalizations about what one does or does not believe. In every case, those generalizations end up being meaningless. But hey, it's a sufficiently hook-ing opening line, enough to raise your eyebrows and compel you to hear me out, which was the actual point of writing it!)

I am going to make the case that our agency on earth is far more limited than we latter-day saints usually tend to think, and that limited agency is actually a "tender mercy" - an individualized blessing directly from God that demonstrates His divinity and love for each of us on the most immensely personal level that is only just barely imaginable.

We know that what causes us to make choices is not always something within our control. I think that most latter-day saints will resist this idea, probably because we so strongly value our agency, but this is an obvious fact that we must all come to face at some point. Here are some specific examples:

• Parole is more likely to be granted to prisoners by a parole board who has just eaten.
• Mass murderer Charles Whitman had a brain tumor which undeniably affected his choice to murder his mother, his wife, fourteen other people (including a pregnant woman) and eventually himself.
• (halfway through the article, the guy is named "Alex") ...and this guy's recurring brain tumor also definitely affected his choices.
• You are more likely to buy products (or help people) when you smell something good

Here are some more common-sense, broad examples:

• We can't make choices for the people that we love. We can't force our children to behave, and neither can we force our siblings, parents, and spouses to do what we want them to do.
• We are born with a set of individual, unique DNA that determines all kinds of things about our physical body: now that I am born, I can't alter that DNA (well...maybe in the future that will be somewhat possible with DNA splicing, but...) to change all kinds of things about myself which affect me and the choices which I make on a daily basis.  
• So far as we know, we don't choose where we are born, to whom we are born, when we are born, the circumstances of our families - all kinds of things about our environment are the way they are, and they aren't ours to choose. Yet these have bearing on our choices and actions.
• I learn many things which I can't remember perfectly. I have to learn them over and over and over, and even then sometimes I don't really fully understand what I've learned. My memory (or lack thereof) definitely affects my agency.

Our environment and our genetics play huge, huge roles in the everyday decisions we make, and failing to admit that is pretty prideful, in my opinion.

I had an awful nightmare the other night, the specifics of which are just a little bit too personal to recount. I don't know if you've ever experienced this, but it is truly horrible to wake up and then feel worse. In this case, the thing that was so horrible was a significant loss of my own personal agency, which also had to do with my memory. In my dream, I had no memory of x happening to me, but then I discovered that it had, and I was livid. I am not exactly sure what is the role of memory in relationship to agency, but it has to be connected in some important way.

On Sunday I got up and bore my testimony of limited agency being evidence of God's love for me. I testified to a group of 200-some-odd people that I strongly believe that God designed the exact circumstances of my life - including my environment, my DNA, all these things that work on, pull at, tug, and often limit, my personal agency. If this life is a test, which I believe it is, then the maker of the test knew what He was doing. He wasn't going to give me a test which I would definitely fail. In fact, because He loves me, and wants me to succeed and pass the test and return to live with Him again, this test He gave me has the greatest chance for me to succeed. Therefore, the circumstances which limit my agency are evidence that He thought them through beforehand, and it's okay to let go of some of the piles of typical Christian guilt that we (read: I) so often lay upon ourselves (myself) over our (my) human condition.

The test is simple: will we follow Jesus Christ?

We probably don't talk that much about our limitations because it would be really easy to make it sound like an excuse to sin. After all, if we don't have agency, or if it is severely handicapped - if all my choices were predetermined - then what does it matter if I become a whore or rob from the bank or willfully murder somebody or...? I do still scratch my head to observe my friends who do not believe in God or consequences of life after death, who are still very devoted to following their own moral codes, most of which intersect very closely with my own. Why? I know that keeping commandments very often results in temporal blessings - like, if you don't sleep around, you're way less likely to get an STD, for example. But if I did not have a strong belief in God, I imagine I would justify my sins a whole lot more and be much less apt to make righteous choices.

(This, by the way, is probably why a loving God put me into a latter-day saint family. He designed the test so that I would have the best chance to succeed. But I digress.)

Also we are limited as to our knowledge of our limitations. Sometimes we know them, but other times we actually don't. In a way, it is good for us to not preoccupy ourselves too much with thoughts about our limitations, again, to avoid making excuses for not choosing the right. 

To paraphrase a conversation I had recently about a person who was really getting on my friend's nerves:

My friend: "Do you think that someday, after we die, I'll get to talk to him and this condition of his will be removed, so that we will really be able to talk and I'll really be able to understand him?"

 

Me: "I think...I think that is what it will be like for all of us, actually. I think after we die, and are resurrected and receive perfect bodies, with perfect brains, we will finally, finally be able to successfully communicate. I think we all have some kind of "condition" - not just this person, but you, me - everybody around us."

I like to think this conversation was a great comfort to my friend. It's comforting to me that I don't have to bear the burden of all my awkwardness alone.

Christians in general also probably don't think a lot about the limitations of our agency because we've been told we won't be given trials that are too much for us to handle (except for like, the trials which cause us to die, I guess). Still, for people like me who are more apt to lament the fact that we are so imperfect, I think recognizing that my limitations were predetermined is a hugely comforting reassurance. It gives me permission to trust that things will be okay in spite of what it seems. Deterministic atheists inherently believe this. Things are the way they are, and that's okay. It's as it should be.

Elder Hales said, "Agency permits us to make faithful, obedient choices that strengthen us so that we can lift and strengthen others." I think if we had perfect agency we would be able to successfully do that perfectly at all times. In other words, I strongly believe that the difference between mortals and God is that God has perfect agency and we don't yet. Because we are limited by our knowledge, we don't have the perfect ability that God has to minister to others. The point is that we should always strive to be more godlike, in spite of these limitations; this is why the Christian message is so often completely centered on what we can do with our agency, which is to repent and to come unto Christ. This theme must be repeated several thousand times throughout all the scriptures, both ancient and modern.

I think 2 Nephi 9:25 is evidence supporting this, "people have limited agency and that's okay," theory. Basically, here Jacob suggests that if there's no law, there's no punishment for x, and without punishment for x there's no condemnation for x, and without condemnation for x, the mercy of God through the Atonement of Jesus Christ covers x. What is x? All of the pain and suffering humans have ever felt but not been accountable for, either because they were pain from our human condition, or pain from sin for which we weren't fully accountable because we didn't have the knowledge (aka the law) - or the capacity to have that knowledge.

Later in the chapter is that verse about the vainness and the frailties and the foolishness of men, for when they are learned they think they are wise and hearken not unto the counsel of God. Why should latter-day saints assume that this knowledge does not also include gospel knowledge? For my entire life I have felt like as saints, we assume that because we have the restored gospel we have perfect agency. 

We definitely don't. 

Our agency is definitely limited still because we are human. We should take a page out of the deterministic atheist's book and recognize that our agency is limited, and what a blessing from God that it is. I don't think I'd do very well in a test of perfect agency. I'm not there yet.