Short answer, from the philosophy of Ethics: A person will choose what he perceives will result in a preponderance of satisfying consequences. If you had absolute knowledge of God, no doubts whatsoever, would you ever choose to do something to piss Him off with the certainty of an eternity in hell? That could not possibly lead to a preponderance of satisfying consequences and would be irrational. You would never choose to take a bite of the apple. Or not to. There would be no decision to be made.
On the other hand without perfect knowledge there's a decision to be made. Do I do something which is fun but may offend God if He exists. Or do I forego pleasure in hopes of being rewarded in heaven. Where do the preponderance of satisfying consequences lie? Could choose either way.
In a nutshell. Ethics was a 3 credit college course with prerequisites.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
