Do you believe in fate?

Nala

I have mixed opinions as to whether fate exists or not. Sometimes something seems like it was "meant to be", like a friendship, and then turns out it was wrong.
I'm just wondering if you think fate exists or not.

simu

No. With fate, you're attaching a teleology to the universe (that's to say, you're saying that the universe has some sort of grand, pre-determined purpose) and this doesn't fit into observations of how the universe works.

Sometimes something seems like it was "meant to be", like a friendship, and then turns out it was wrong.

What exactly do you mean by "meant to be"? In my experience, when people say this, they mean that some event has caused them to feel happy or comfortable and that, when they try to imagine what their lives would have been like had the event not ocurred, they imagine that their lives would have been poorer or they are incapable of imagining the event not happening so they jump to the conclusion that it had to happen. So, I think fate is the result of the narrowness of the human imagination and also, the unwillingness of humans to face the idea that the greater universe is indifferent to our emotions.

chewy

what a phrase:)


"the unwillingness of humans to face the idea that the greater universe is indifferent to our emotions"


i bet you could write a song about or something....

karma kabbage

well great phrase it is indeed but . . . . I thought the whole point of fate was that you must take the good with the bad! Some things are meant to be but equally so some things are not meant to be! Which indicates that the universe is indeed unconcerned with our feelings and moreover concerned with it's own course and destiny (us being but parts of that destiny)

I assume it is now a given that I am a believer in fate.

simu

Originally posted by karma kabbage
well great phrase it is indeed but . . . . I thought the whole point of fate was that you must take the good with the bad! Some things are meant to be but equally so some things are not meant to be! Which indicates that the universe is indeed unconcerned with our feelings and moreover concerned with it's own course and destiny (us being but parts of that destiny)

I assume it is now a given that I am a believer in fate.

So, you think that the universe has its own destiny and that we're just byproducts or a fairly minor part of this, if I understand you correctly. What kind of a destiny would a universe have, though? As far as I can see, destiny implies some sort of a purpose or a goal to be achieved and this, in turn, implies some sort of intelligence or program or some regulatory mechanism that sets out this goal and sees that it gets done. What sort of entity or thing could do that and how would it fit into the universe as we know it now? (Admittedly, we don't quite yet know everything about the universe)!

Would this goal be written into the laws that govern the universe or would it come from some outside source? Is it possible even to conceive of a force outside the universe?

When you say that stuff is meant to be do you mean that it is something that the laws of causality of the universe allow to happen i.e. a possible outcome of a given state or is there some other force that would have decided that a certain possible outcome is preferable to all other possible outcomes that can follow a given state of events without contravening the laws of the universe and thus, makes it so? Or are you just saying that people can't make all of thier wishes come true?

In short, what is this fate that you believe in?

karma kabbage

the fate in which I believe . . I'll do my best but let it be noted I'll have to get back to work in 25mins so bare with me. I believe that the universe is not so much a tangible thing . . . so i suppose existance would be a better word? but I beleve there is a set path along which it go . . . . bad examples might be that we were meant to have a renaissance as we were meant to have wars . . . I believe that though not everything is laid out . . ie-Leonardo may not have started to use a sfmuto (damn my spelling) technique (re: mona lisa) during the renaissance, but both the man and the new technique needed to 'stake their claim' in forever.

I'm not thinking of the universe as an intelligent being in itself, but of fate as the power which governs it . . . and at this point I run into a conflict of Board themes as God does come into my believe system, but I'm trying to keep it all logical. So as for fate as a force . . not intelligent but a force as energy is a force. The idea of energy travelling along a food chain would have been laughable not to long ago, as our understanding was even less!!

As for 'meant to be' it's a painfull and vague cliché which I've never liked much. But i use it to describe what i conceive to be destiny. When I say this I do not mean that every single detail is pre-ordained. Things like choosing to have a can of coke on the way to the bus as opposed to a can of 7-up may not be precisely destiny . . . . but I do think that certain things in life are pre-destined and will happen! What they are I'm not sure I admit . . .

As for reaching that star and making wishes come true, well maybe not always, but yes I think i'ts fair to say sometimes you cannot get what you want no matter what you do and I think this is fate.

Tell me more of your view please.

Fysh

Originally posted by karma kabbage
the fate in which I believe . . I'll do my best but let it be noted I'll have to get back to work in 25mins so bare with me. I believe that the universe is not so much a tangible thing . . . so i suppose existance would be a better word? but I beleve there is a set path along which it go . . . . bad examples might be that we were meant to have a renaissance as we were meant to have wars . . . I believe that though not everything is laid out . . ie-Leonardo may not have started to use a sfmuto (damn my spelling) technique (re: mona lisa) during the renaissance, but both the man and the new technique needed to 'stake their claim' in forever.

I'm not thinking of the universe as an intelligent being in itself, but of fate as the power which governs it . . . and at this point I run into a conflict of Board themes as God does come into my believe system, but I'm trying to keep it all logical. So as for fate as a force . . not intelligent but a force as energy is a force. The idea of energy travelling along a food chain would have been laughable not to long ago, as our understanding was even less!!

As for 'meant to be' it's a painfull and vague cliché which I've never liked much. But i use it to describe what i conceive to be destiny. When I say this I do not mean that every single detail is pre-ordained. Things like choosing to have a can of coke on the way to the bus as opposed to a can of 7-up may not be precisely destiny . . . . but I do think that certain things in life are pre-destined and will happen! What they are I'm not sure I admit . . .

As for reaching that star and making wishes come true, well maybe not always, but yes I think i'ts fair to say sometimes you cannot get what you want no matter what you do and I think this is fate.

Tell me more of your view please.

Speaking as a physicist, describing energy as a force is incorrect. But that's because the physics definition of force and the word as you are using it don't quite match up. I still disagree though.

Some things happen, some things do not. Attaching a greater meaning to such events or lack of events requires there to be a Great Manipulator somewhere who is conspiring not only for these events to occur or not, but also for us to evolve consciousness in such a way as to see and correctly interpret these meanings. Which brings us back to a more straightforward God debate.

To give an example:

I do not now, nor will I in the foreseeable future, move in the same circles as Hollywood stars and international supermodels. It is therefore highly unlikely that I shall end up having a torrid affair with (picking a name at random) Eva Herzigova, on the basis that, even if we were to meet, we would have so little in common as to make any form of extended relationship very difficult.

Now, I could say that this is because I am fated to not have such an affair, or I could say that my current circumstances make it extremely unlikely. The main distinction between the two is how much personal influence this grants me over my life - if I choose to believe in fate, I will likely resign myself to not having any chance for this affair and, barring some hollywood-blockbuster-style chain of improbable events, will likely never see it materialise. However, if I do not believe in fate, I can still try and make it happen somehow - perhaps by trying to get a job in my field with strong connections to the modelling world, or something similar.

Essentially, my problem with fate is that it is almost impossible for fate to make sense except in retrospect. Thus, we are observing a series of events and their conclusion, evaluating the conclusion in light of its origins, and then creating some form of ulterior motivation for the series of events which is not in fact required.

It may help to consider the quantum perspective when considering this sort of topic - essentially the quantum view is that all events have a probability of occuring and none are definite. This might either lead to one universe in which the events that occur are governed chiefly by probability, or infinite universes, each with a unique combination of events that have occured. One could argue that the "single universe" scenario is at least not incompatible with fate, but there is no significant evidence for any sort of force manipulating or influencing events as of yet.

karma kabbage

i hereby issue a restraining order, science must stay 40 ft away from religion at all times!! The two shall never get on. Science has never been a fav area of mine as it is so factual, refusing to accept anything which cnnot be proved without question . . things like the earth being in fact round for example. (nb - fate as a force is what i said, not fate is a force. I wasn't using the scientific definition)

However I accept that there is little to back my case up that can be out down in words. But to discuss further . . . taking your example: no it prolly is not your fate to end up with ms.x the superstar as you do indeed have very different lifestyles, however if it were fate for you and your darling ms.x then you would find yourself in the circle you need to meet and get along with this charming lady.

If for example you're a physicist, it's not likely that you are fated for this woman

or further in your discussion . . . . if one were now to decide (assuming they DO believe in fate) that this is the one and only girl for them that the must take evasive action to move into the correct circle and pursue this person . . . then that in turn would be part of their fate. . . . or not.

As for seeing fate in hindsight well, yes of course! Unles you believe in fortune tellers or magic predictions then this is the only means to see one's fate!

simu

Well, what you say about science isn't quite true. You can't prove everything but you can come up with some explanations that seem more probable than others to explain observed phenomena - evolution would be an example of an idea accpeted and used by (most) scientists although there's no mathematical theorem that proves it's true!

As for seeing fate in hindsight well, yes of course! Unles you believe in fortune tellers or magic predictions then this is the only means to see one's fate!

So, fate is a pattern you can see when you look back over your life? This isn't all that different from saying that humans are able to see how they moved from one state to another in their lives and to make stories out of their experiences. It's true but it's not really all that meaningful an observation imo. These stories we create about our lives are cool and they're probably a necessary psychological support for dealing with life but that's it imo - they're just based on the one path of the many possible paths that our lives happened to take. We could have had a world where the Renaissance never took place or a world where ten Renaissances happened but we happened to end up with a world in which only one Renaissance happened (so far anyway!). These other worlds would all be very different to ours, had they come to be insead of this world, because once one thing happens rather than another thing, you get different sets of consequences that, in turn, have conseuquences and so on...

(nb - fate as a force is what i said, not fate is a force. I wasn't using the scientific definition)

Well, this fate, whatever it was, would act on things in the physical universe by definition and so, it's not unreasonable to think that if such a thing did exist, it could be probed by the instruments of science. How would you have it interacting with the physical universe?

Hellm0

If I were to go up to a stranger in the street and slap them across the face, not only would it have a phsycal efect but it would also leave that person wanting revenge. The question would be why would I be motivated to do such a thing, maybe someone did it to me. Cause and effect governs what happens, just as the energy I expend to do something comes from the food I eat and the air I breath.

Therefore, the world is predecided. Of course this doest mean there is no god, it just means hes a very good mathematian.

Naos

Originally posted by karma kabbage

If for example you're a physicist, it's not likely that you are fated for this woman

or any woman ...

Fysh

Originally posted by karma kabbage
i hereby issue a restraining order, science must stay 40 ft away from religion at all times!! The two shall never get on. Science has never been a fav area of mine as it is so factual, refusing to accept anything which cnnot be proved without question . . things like the earth being in fact round for example. (nb - fate as a force is what i said, not fate is a force. I wasn't using the scientific definition)

Well, all I can say to that is that you are entitled to believe whatever you choose, but I and many others like me won't be convinced to change what we think without some convincing reasoning and evidence. As for the science/religion debate, I imagine you can guess where I fall on that, but this isn't really the place for that sort of question. (Although I would add that, your comments about the world being round don't really make sense - satellite imaging can confirm this, as can experiments involving radio transmission whose results are incompatible with flat earth theories.)

If for example you're a physicist, it's not likely that you are fated for this woman

Any particular reason for this comment, or should I just assume you're going on the traditional (and largely incorrect, I might add) stereotype of physicists?

As for seeing fate in hindsight well, yes of course! Unles you believe in fortune tellers or magic predictions then this is the only means to see one's fate!

Errr...I don't follow this. If fate can only be understood in retrospect, then discussing the concept is pointless until one's life is complete, ie you are dead. At which point you're not the liveliest person at the party. Even aside from this problem of incomplete information, your argument for the existence of fate strikes me as little more than anthropic reasoning or a desire to imbue meaning into the world where none is required. What I'm getting at is that it appears to make no difference to the world, unless one chooses to then consult fotune tellers etc (A whole different can of worms again).

SkepticOne

Originally posted by karma kabbage
no it prolly is not your fate to end up with ms.x the superstar as you do indeed have very different lifestyles, however if it were fate for you and your darling ms.x then you would find yourself in the circle you need to meet and get along with this charming lady.

Is fate then being used here as a word meaning some event that is unlikely but nevertheless happened?

e.g "X would not normally happen, but it did. Therefore it was fate."

I would say that the word fate is normally used when an unlikely event occurs where the causes behind the vent are unclear or unknown and the event has some personal significance.

In such circumstances we might then go on to believe that there was some plan or intention behind the event for example the Jules character in the film, Pulp Fiction, believing that God had intervened when the bullets missed him.

karma kabbage

If you are a physicist it is unlikely you were meant for this woman

That was part of my superstar example. I meant it was unlikey as physicists and superstars don't often have cause to mix so the likelhood of that being fated is slim. Though now that you mention the stereotype......

As for fate coming up in relation to unlikely scenarios . . I (who believe in fate) would say that is because this is when our attention is drawn more to the outcome of particular events.

(AH lunch break ending) and the world being round comment (possibly most over-used example ever!) I meant that the world didn't accept it was round until there was the proof you mentioned. Yeah... reading back over it, it wasn't too clear. :dunno:

snoopish

Fate always appears to be very vaguely defined in anyones head, it being something that people feel oddly comforted by with the idea that whatever decisions they make , the consequences would have happened no matter what...and to be frank this is a ridiculous idea.But it is essentially what we believe fate to be. Once I used to be an avid believer in fate, however I have become quite hooked on quantum physics, and see things from a different and more logical perspective!

Fast_Mover

can i say sumtng.....its nothing complicatied like the posts that have gone before me. its stupid really but thought id throw it in anyway.

have ye ever seen the film serendiplicity (sp!sorry!)- if the man and the woman wer meant to be together then he would find the book in which she put her number on the inside cover which she put into sell in a secondhand bookshop and she would find the dollar note which he put his number on which he circulated by buying something in a shop.

as you can guess they both found the things- the man was given the book as a present from his fiance i think, and the woman saw the dollar bill she was on a plane when it was being handed to another passanger as change when she bought sumtng.

anyhow, i do think i believe in fate-everything hapens for a reason and whats meant to be is meant to be.

forgive me for putting that crappy example up when i cuda just mentioned the last line only.

chow!

JimmyL

This is getting interesting...

What is Fate? Events that will happen regardless of what we do? Does that mean all events are pre-determined? Scientifically, that is not the case. Lets say fate is not about everything, just some 'select' events. Given certain conditions, certain events have a high probability of happening. If you leave your phone number in a library book, there is high probability that someone will find one. If something significant happens as a result of that then people would consider that as fate, i.e. fate is an observed phenomenon - scientifically speaking. Fate, luck and other superstitious concepts are a result of how we as individual sees the world (like the glass is half full rather than half empty) and we attach meaning to events in our lives.

I should really stop here but our understanding of the universe is incomplete, so there are possibilities...

Lets talk about karma...
(actually, I don't really know what karma means but it sounded good. I apologise if I am using the term wrong. If someone could enlighten me...)

Lets say there is more to us than biology. Lets say the sum of our being including our consciousness gives rise to a 'life' force - remember gravity, magnetism and nuclear force existed before we 'discovered' them. These 'life' forces can interact and conspire to make things happen (don't really have time to expand on this), like two people meeting (like forces attract). Could this be fate?

(Got to go...)

Fysh

Well, sticking to the example cited for relationships, fate-exponents always seem to think in terms of person X being fated to hook up with person Y.

Let me put this in perspective.

There's about 6 BILLION of us on the planet these days.

What about the BILLIONS of other people that Person X must therefore logically be fated NOT to hook up with? Why does nobody talk about them?

Because it's not interesting. "Fate" or "Destiny" is nothing more than a selective filter, applied after a chain of events whose outcome is usually satisfactory, whose purpose is to convince the person who experienced the events that they were somehow "meant" to happen, that their state of happiness is not arbitrary. Why? Because an arbitrary state of happiness would mean that it could be removed at any time, and heaven forbid that happen.

I find it interesting that not a single person defending the fate/destiny idea has so far suggested anything like a mechanism for it to happen with, which could actually be experimentally tested. "Life fields" are a small step in this direction, but, well, what are they? How do they emerge? Are they co-dependent on conscious thought (as in, what's the point of being fated to have something happen to you if you're not going to be consciously aware of it anyway?)? And, if they are something that can be physically detected, how do they work? More importantly, how can we manipulate them?

Trip

I don't think it's the question of whether you believe in fate but whether fate exists because not to believe in something that does exist is taking away it's existence , so in otherwords yea fate does exist as long as one person believes in it so there isn't a point in not believing in fate .

keu

"Whatever limits us we call fate...fate is immense, so is power." Ralph Waldo Emerson

Trip

Originally posted by keu
"Whatever limits us we call fate...fate is immense, so is power." Ralph Waldo Emerson

But than what limits us ? Nothing Except death so is death fate ? or is ther a way around that too ? Everytime we find something to "limit" us we escape it so after death does fate cease to exist ?

keu

But than what limits us? Nothing Except death so is death fate

I think you answered your own question there. Death is inevitable and would therefore be deemed as fate..(as many people try to avoid it have been unsuccesful since time began)
so therefore, fate exists.
The rest of your question

so after death does fate cease to exist

might be better directed at ralph waldo emerson, who I hear is quite dead, perhaps he has the answers.

..but personally if fate is limitations, then it would suggest that after death there are none. (sounds a bit like how they describe heaven to me)
...and so the answer you seek lays within your own personal beliefs.

Fysh

following up on Trip's comment...does this mean that Pink Elephants, the Tooth fairy and any number of other utterly fictional entities exist? Kids, ignorant people and other subsets of our society believe in them. Belief and proof, or indeed belief and fact are two totally different things...

Originally posted by keu
I think you answered your own question there. Death is inevitable and would therefore be deemed as fate..(as many people try to avoid it have been unsuccesful since time began)
so therefore, fate exists.

Err, no. Death exists, and you're calling it a different name.

Trip

Originally posted by Fysh
does this mean that Pink Elephants, the Tooth fairy and any number of other utterly fictional entities exist? Kids, ignorant people and other subsets of our society believe in them. Belief and proof, or indeed belief and fact are two totally different things...

Not to get off the topic but in a way yes all you mentioned above in thoery should exist because if you belueve in God that makes him "real" so to believe in anything makes that "real" only to the person.

but than it leads into the whole seeing than believing or believing than seeing but than with enough illegal substances you will see pink elephants and yes sometimes the toothfairy...:D

But even if you think on it the names had to come from somewhere so at one stage they must of been in existance just like when they were thinking of a name for a cat they said what's the flying little girl holdin a tooth called ...:D

Fysh

Originally posted by Trip
Not to get off the topic but in a way yes all you mentioned above in thoery should exist because if you belueve in God that makes him "real" so to believe in anything makes that "real" only to the person.

but than it leads into the whole seeing than believing or believing than seeing but than with enough illegal substances you will see pink elephants and yes sometimes the toothfairy...:D

But even if you think on it the names had to come from somewhere so at one stage they must of been in existance just like when they were thinking of a name for a cat they said what's the flying little girl holdin a tooth called ...:D

.....

Go and read about the mind/body problem, and then see if you still think that "oh, if someone believes in god that makes him real" is not only a valid argument, but also factually correct.

Never mind the fact that you're overlooking the human faculty to make things up - to invent and describe things that do not have any basis in the physical world. As a species, we've done it more or less since we've been able to think.

Can't figure out what thunder is? Maybe there's some big bloke in the sky who shouts and makes the noise, and throws lightning bolts around the place. Nobody's seen him, but do you have a better explanation?

If you're saying that these things exist as ideas, then yes they do. But that doesn't mean they have any existence in our universe, or at least not one for which any kind of proof, whether by logical deduction or by experiment, has so far been found.

Trip

Originally posted by Fysh

But that doesn't mean they have any existence in our universe, or at least not one for which any kind of proof, whether by logical deduction or by experiment, has so far been found.

I can agree mostly with you but if you can't prove somethings inexistance than it does exist . Ok now holding with this thought the only reason people have for things not existin is that they haven't seen them like people not believing in God because they can't see him but than (and i feel stupid for saying this) the tooth fairy could exist because the only reason we have for her not existing is the same reason we have for God not existing.

There must of been some foundation for these "fictional" charecters like st.nick for example there was a nickolas who gave presents to poor people...(you know the story) so there must of been foundations for everthing else even the concept of fate. Do you agree ?

keu

go with me...
if you believe that only phsyical things are real, and that the thought does not validate the "existance" of something does that mean love does not exist.
sure, you can go into the details of the "phsyical" proof of love, but it would be as questionable as st. nick or the tooth fairy.
Many people can claim they have experienced "love", but it could well be boiled down to chemical reactions and relabelled "love".
As many people could claim they have experienced "God", but personal experiences don't seem appropriate evidential proof.
It could also be debated that love is not real, that it is an illusion based on how someone thinks or feels. I'm not sure "love" can be measured either.
I could argue that much of those chemical reactions might be better described as "lust". (the urge to copulate?) Not love.
So "love" is nothing more than a thought, or a feeling, or an emotion. Many would same the same about st nick (the spirit of christmas) or God, something untangiable, untouchable, and of which the reality of could be questioned.
Yet most people would say it exists.
Proove it does.

Trip

But wouldn't that mean that we would have no feelings ? Does that mean that feelings doesn't exist ?

keu

on topic of if anything exists....

don't know really, still questioning if "love" is real.
Have you ever had your heart broken?, I have and it bloody hurt.
but it wasn't actually physically broken. it just felt that way.

so I cant prove it outside of my experience, I can just tell you that in my experience love hurts, but can make you feel incredibly good at the same time.
Then I realised I only thought I was it was love, so it wasn't very real at all....very much all boiled down to an illusion.
I might be able to validate the experience of love by finding others who have experienced it too,
But these claims are not much outside the realm of thoughts and feelings. (and those chemical reactions which we give nice names to)
like I said not tangiable real thing. unlike a motorbike.

Fysh

Given we're talking about love, and other emotions...I presume you've heard of Valium, ecstasy, and other mood-altering drugs? Their existence (which can be proved by experiment) alone is enough to suggest that emotions are at least significantly affected by chemical levels in the brain - seratonin and so forth. I'm no neurologist, but between the effects of pheromones on human behaviour and the effect of chemical levels within the brain, I've yet to see any convincing need for external "emotions" which are independent of any rational thought or physical process. (And before anyone mentions "love at first sight", the proper word for it is "infatuation")

As for "if you can't prove it *doesn't* exist, then it does exist"...that's just stupid. By that argument there's an angry demented dwarf called Klaus (spot the reference, anyone?) standing just behind you, perpetually about to cut your head off. But you can't see him because he always stands *just* behind you and angles himself out of the way of any mirrors you try and use. And is invisible to tv cameras. And nobody else tells you about him because they don't like you and really want him to cut your head off. Do you start to see how stupidly convoluted this sort of thing gets?

I mean, come on. This is supposed to be the philosophy board, offer some real justification for your statements. In particular, prove to me why I should ignore Occam's razor in this case and believe in some being that has no physical evidence of existing. Otherwise you're just talking about a load of tree-hugging crap. In which case, take it elsewhere. This thread stopped being interesting several posts back, but now it's gotten just plain rubbish, really.

As for the origins of St. Nick...yes, there are origins to the story. However, if you're honestly claiming that this proves the existence of a fat dude in a red suit who flies around and gives every kid in the world presents in one night, then I have no recourse but to dub you by the name "Moron" and cease to waste my time trying to offer scientific criticisms of the crap you're spouting.

keu

(And before anyone mentions "love at first sight", the proper word for it is "infatuation")

I'll go with that.
love aint real puppies

(waves to klaus)

keu

Err, no. Death exists, and you're calling it a different name

actually i was looking at in a different context. (in relation to the reference of limitations)

Fysh

Originally posted by keu
actually i was looking at in a different context. (in relation to the reference of limitations)

I suppose what I should have said is that, if death is the only thing we're incorporating into our definition of fate, then it's not really necessary to have "fate" as a separate word.

JimmyL

Back to the original post (by the way, just noticed that the original poster hasn't posted anything else here).

The first question was, "Do you believe in fate?". Then he asked if fate existed.

The two questions are not the same. Personally, I do not believe in things that (can be proven to ) exist. What would be the point?

On the question of fate existence, it really depends on your definition of fate. Is fate the concept of events happening for a reason or it is an unseen force that make things happen? Very true for the former but very questionable for latter.

The example of invisible head cutting dwarf: I can certainly accept that someone would believe that there is such a dwarf but the existence of the dwarf would depend on the observer - existentialism?

Dancing duck

This debate with a few less words and a few more, could easily be exchanged with one on 'do you believe in god' (not saying the same people would necessarily say the same thing). How can you say the people who have a belief in something you don't, but can't be certain does not exist, are wrong to have it?

But it's the choice of do you want to life, with faith put in something other than the proof? You can be of great intelligence and accept that accepting the concrete evidence means you've used the scientific world's finds to control your life and mind. But you can put your mind to equally good use and believe that not everything is tangible, and just like the unknown explanatory process of love, there are other forces at work like those that stop the scientists discovering what happens to us when we're finished with life.

I believe in fate, and I know well I could be wrong to and like with a god above, there's a chance it doesn't really exist. But it can make your life more bearable, and more spiritual, and more enchanted, to think that when we make mistakes we make them for a reason, and that when coincidences occur, they were already arranged to. It does no-one any harm to romanticize a short life. Like with God, if you come to the end of the road and see it was all unfounded, then what have you lost? If believing in God had made you more ethical and thankful for what you had, then did it matter that like with being good for Santa, it need not have been done to get the reward?

Fysh

Yes, but in that case the existence of Klaus is solely within the delusional reality of the person who thinks they have Klaus behind him (and yes, believing that everyone in the world is keeping a secret from you because they hate you is considered a pretty strong indication of some sort of paranoid delusion).

It still doesn't confer a physical existence upon him, and were Klaus to "attack" his intended victim, anyone else examining the body would find no evidence of the presence of Klaus because he wasn't physically there. Depending on the delusion, the victim might self-inflict serious wounds, but there would be evidence that can demonstrate this was the case (types of bruising, angle and serration of cuts/incisions.

I presume that, by "events happening for a reason" you're referring to causality (as in, the continuity of physical laws as we understand them within our universe). If not, please elaborate what you mean. I agree with you regarding belief vs existence, incidentally. If something can be verified by some sort of proof, either logical or experimental, then belief in that thing is somewhat pointless - it will exist whtehr or not you believe in it.

keu

I don't want to take the thread too far off topic, but again in relation to the original question of the existance of something of which there is no concrete evidence.

When placed in context, what is considered real in terms of philosophy-that which exists objectively in the world regardless of subjectivity or conventions of thought or language, is largley what is observable phenomena. In the case of klaus the dwarf, to us he is not observable, and therefore is not real.
Yet subjectively he is very real to the experiencer.
I thought about how time is not exactly an observable phenomena, we make those observations based on the effects of time.
We don't see time, so to speak, we see the effects of it and therefore it exists and is "real".

In the same instance, if a Klaus situation as described here did occur (and this is not an uncommon scenario) although we could not observe Klaus and determine if he is real, we could observe the effects of klaus, which in ways described (inflicting serious wounds) are quite real and observable.

It still doesn't confer a physical existence upon him, and were Klaus to "attack" his intended victim, anyone else examining the body would find no evidence of the presence of Klaus because he wasn't physically there. Depending on the delusion, the victim might self-inflict serious wounds, but there would be evidence that can demonstrate this was the case (types of bruising, angle and serration of cuts/incisions.

The existance of Klaus is subjective, yet the effects of his existance are objective (and observable)
(edit:have to add, I mean to understand that in this situation if the experiencer inflicts self harm under the influence of "klaus")

Thankfully klaus is just a dwarf and dragons eat dwarfs for breakfast.

....but from a slightly different angle and yet with the same interpretation, many people do believe in "god" and the effects are just as observable (and perhaps questionable in many cases) I supose it would depend on the subjective experience of what "God" is to those who believe in it/him as to the physical effects it produces.

As with love, all these things are subjective, yet the effects are common observable phenomena and in some way this gives some sort of tangibilty, proof or credence that these things do exist within particular parametres of what is referred to as a physical existance.

So, perhaps what I am saying is, our beliefs can shape our reality, (we make them real by believing in them and the proof is in the pudding to so speak) if you believe in fate, than that is how you will percieve your reality. It's indifferent really and if it gives you a sense of purpose or helps you make some sense out of something much greater than ourselves (universe) than so be it.

impr0v

Surely to believe in fate is to state that all the choices you make are not actually choice, the path already having being laid out before you. What's the point in going on?

On the (simplified) journey through life I come to a 'T' junction. The free will school of thought says i have two choices: left or right (ignore going back/standing still for clarity).

The fate school of thought says I will instinctively (or be compelled to, by a higher power, or for a reason) choose the correct road to lead me to my fate.

This means I have no choice, as I cannot possibly choose the alternative road, since I am pre-destined to arrive at the end of the fated one, unless of course the alternative road has the same destination as the fated one.

The only way for fate to be true is for it to be another name for death, which fych already said, as it is the only destination that all roads lead to.

keu

This means I have no choice, as I cannot possibly choose the alternative road, since I am pre-destined to arrive at the end of the fated one, unless of course the alternative road has the same destination as the fated one.

hate to be the one to tell you, but no, you don't have much choice, as if you had read the entire thread, you might have discovered that fate was equated to limitations with death being the greatest of these, you WILL die.
and you don't have any choice in the matter.
doesn't matter when where or how this particular "fate" is inevitability but it doesn't suggest you have no control over your life. (free will)

The fate school of thought says I will instinctively (or be compelled to, by a higher power, or for a reason) choose the correct road to lead me to my fate.

what school would this be?
edit: have you ever considered there may not be such a thing as in incorrect road and this would also be considered fate to the extent that this is a limitation..(can do no wrong?) this would suggest that ultimately every "choice" you make is the right one, no matter how "bad" it may initially seem and promotes the idea that there is "purpose" in everything.

What's the point in going on?

well..if love isn't real and we have no "real" purpose and if nothing really matters at the end of the day because we are all microscopic bi products of a benign universe, what point is there going on anyway?

call fate what you will, thats your own reality.

lisa.c

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!! have you all missed the pint of this thread??? while you all have gone over board and have given lenghty and quite boring replys with words that most people wouln'nt understand, this thread has turned in to a (im better than you at longer replies and can add more bigger words there fore im more impressive) when quite simply the thread starter asked one simlpe question.......Do you belive in fate?.... a simple yes or no would of done.....

lisa.c

just to add to that in my own simple terms yes i do belive in fate. my idea of fate is ... it is what you make it make just like luck love life and happiness. if i choose to be scum them naturally my fate lies in the courts and jails of ireland. if i choose to be honest and decent (which i am) then my fate will lie in a happy house and family (which i have). your fate is what you make it and is determined by the choices you make. now you all probably disagree with me and thats fine but they are my beliefs and what i belive in.

keu

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!! have you all missed the pint of this thread??? while you all have gone over board and have given lenghty and quite boring replys with words that most people wouln'nt understand, this thread has turned in to a (im better than you at longer replies and can add more bigger words there fore im more impressive) when quite simply the thread starter asked one simlpe question.......Do you belive in fate?.... a simple yes or no would of done.....

this is funny.(because its true)
Unfortunately the object of this forum it seems is to reason by valid method on any given topic. (The topic wasn't exactly "do you believe in fate"..it was "do you believe fate exists"...enter discussion on proving (validly) the existance of all related issues.)

On being introduced to this forum I discovered very quickly that while you may have an opinion, it is not accepted unless it is a "valid" one.
So its not exactly a forum for expressing opinions in so much as discussing pedantically with grand gestures of secular information. (lots of meaningless big words)

..and while the original post provoked many responses all of them failed to note the actual subject matter. (friendship issues)....which I suppose wouldn't be the kind of subject matter that is normally adressed here.

with regard to your beliefs, as we grow up, we tend to realise that all this stuff is a lot of bullsh!t and what matters most are the things which matter to you (family, sense of worth, happiness, well being), and I doubt anyone has the right to take any of those things away from you, just because they don't agree with or believe in them personally.

I would agree that the philosophy of simplicity is lost on this forum (a disregarded value of wisdom)

but thanks for giving some perspective.

simu

On being introduced to this forum I discovered very quickly that while you may have an opinion, it is not accepted unless it is a "valid" one.

Well, people might disagree with your opinions but they're entitled to do so. I haven't banned people for expressing their ideas and neither will I unless they're wildly off-topic or insulting to other posters (to disagree with someone is not to insult them).

Dancing duck

No, not everyone did what you say they did.

keu

Well, people might disagree with your opinions but they're entitled to do so. I haven't banned people for expressing their ideas and neither will I unless they're wildly off-topic or insulting to other posters (to disagree with someone is not to insult them)

This is totally irrelevant. I never suggested people are not entitled to disagree with others opinions. And for the sake of clarification, any thread which express an opinion on anything intangible (like god or beliefs) have been insulted as bs ideaologies and never given the oppertunity to flow or grow or develop. You cannot prove god by empirical means, therfore it is theory, and requires an open mind, not empirical evidence and while critical anaylsis is the norm, the forum is biased by secular knowledge, which is not wisdom (of which philosophy is the love of) and is generally based on inexperienced values and qualities. (schoolbook material versus life experience)
for example, you cannot discus the values of love with people who have never experienced it (but have read about it in a book somewhere).

the insults for that matter have been widespread.

impr0v

Originally posted by keu
hate to be the one to tell you, but no, you don't have much choice, as if you had read the entire thread, you might have discovered that fate was equated to limitations with death being the greatest of these, you WILL die.
and you don't have any choice in the matter.

Well how's about that! You learn something new every day.

doesn't matter when where or how this particular "fate" is inevitability but it doesn't suggest you have no control over your life. (free will)

You're just repeating stuff that's already been stated. Obviously, to accept death as an inevitability is not to believe in fate or to deny that one has control over one's life in between birth and death. However to believe in fate as being something other than the inevitability of death, i.e. as being some sort of pre-determined path or purpose, is to believe that one has no real control over one's life at any point between those two events, i.e. that there is no free will.

have you ever considered there may not be such a thing as in incorrect road and this would also be considered fate to the extent that this is a limitation..(can do no wrong?) this would suggest that ultimately every "choice" you make is the right one, no matter how "bad" it may initially seem and promotes the idea that there is "purpose" in everything.

Either you're saying that every road leads to the same destination (already said) or that fate is a fluid thing, it constantly changes depending on what choice you make. But then surely it's not fate, it's as the other poster discussed; looking back at how you've got to where you are and claiming that some kind of purpose got you there, using the concept of fate to fortify your current good position against your fears about it's transience or fragility. The question here is 'do you believe in fate?' i'm saying 'No, and it's because I believe we get to make each individual choice ourselves, and by doing so, make things happen, rather than things happening for a reason.' You aren't really saying anything relevant to change or add to that.

well..if love isn't real and we have no "real" purpose and if nothing really matters at the end of the day because we are all microscopic bi products of a benign universe, what point is there going on anyway?

Love? To paraphrase Tina Turner, 'what's love got to do with it?'. I'm saying that if one believes in fate then one might as well just stop where one is at the moment and not go on, because if there is no choice, nothing variable, what's the point in experiencing it? The ship dosen't need a pilot when it can get to the destination of it's own accord.

call fate what you will, thats your own reality.

From the penguin book of sweeping ambiguous closing statements?

keu

However to believe in fate as being something other than the inevitability of death

actually it would be accepting that death is a part of a predetermined path.
but as I stated, fate is what you perceive it to be and as this is you definition or perception, this is your reality.

what you are stating is your belief...which cannot be argued, so believe what you will.

Either you're saying that every road leads to the same destination (already said) or that fate is a fluid thing

you are born, you die, every road leads to the same destination.

claiming that some kind of purpose got you there

I didn't "claim" anything, but it would seem if you are born at all the ultimate purpose is only to die.

'do you believe in fate?' i'm saying 'No,

thats great..I don't give a crapula what you "believe", thats your right.

and it's because I believe we get to make each individual choice ourselves, and by doing so, make things happen, rather than things happening for a reason.' You aren't really saying anything relevant to change or add to that.

Of course we make things happen. the point is being missed, I'm thinking I might have a more fulfiling discussion if I headed up to the zoo and chatted with the marsupials.
Consider that your reaction or response is "fate".

[edit] Imust stress, I have neither claimed that I believe or do not believe in fate up to this point. I've been more concerned with trying to put a finger on what fate is.
it does seem that all our paths are predetermined (birth-death) I never suggested anything about a "mysterious force which makes our choices for us"
but you did not choose to be born....and you probably do not choose to die, and no matter how much control you have over your life you cannot get away from those very basic facts.

You claim you make your own choices independantly, yet if tonight you went out and met a guy/girl (complete stranger) and discovered the man/woman you were to marry, you should recognise that you didn't "choose" for him to be in the place at that particular time in order to meet him..did you?
Sure you might make the decision to marry him/her, but you would never have met in the first place, if the other party hadn't chosen to be where they were when you met them.
So ultimately, while you have control over your life (free will..you chose to go out too) you had no control over the situation occuring.
perhaps this is what is referred to as "fate"

impr0v

Originally posted by keu
actually it would be accepting that death is a part of a predetermined path.
but as I stated, fate is what you perceive it to be and as this is you definition or perception, this is your reality.

*Sigh*.
Death is part of a predetermined path, we have already established that, please stop repeating yourself. I was taking that as a given and looking at what fate is between the two predetermined points of birth and death. Please read it before repeating yourself again. All perception is by it's nature subjective, again, you aren't saying anything with that sweeping statement.

you are born, you die, every road leads to the same destination.

Are you seeking to learn this maxim via repetetion?
I believe what's under discussion here is the path between those two events.

I didn't "claim" anything, but it would seem if you are born at all the ultimate purpose is only to die.

I was obviously referring to an unspecified individual in a theoretical situation, rather than you in particular. Admittedly I should have used 'one' instead of 'you'.

thats great..I don't give a crapula what you "believe", thats your right.

Cool.

Of course we make things happen. the point is being missed, I'm thinking I might have a more fulfiling discussion if I headed up to the zoo and chatted with the marsupials.

This i don't doubt for a second, given their inability to respond, indifference to repetition and immunity to muddy logic.

Consider that your reaction or response is "fate".

No thanks, I'll consider my response as being the one I chose to make.

I must stress, I have neither claimed that I believe or do not believe in fate up to this point. I've been more concerned with trying to put a finger on what fate is.

So why exactly are you posting if you are not prepared to answer the question posed in the topic, and don't give a crapola what i believe? Trying to put your finger on what fate is? Your finger has repeatedly landed on 'death is certain' and a vague attempt to relate the issue to love and not much else. Perhaps if you clarified what you believe it might add some order to your outbursts.

it does seem that all our paths are predetermined (birth-death) I never suggested anything about a "mysterious force which makes our choices for us"

No you didn't, but that's what the topic is about;

fate
n.

1. The supposed force, principle, or power that predetermines events.
2. The inevitable events predestined by this force.

but you did not choose to be born....and you probably do not choose to die, and no matter how much control you have over your life you cannot get away from those very basic facts.

Repeat first principals ad infinitum.

You claim you make your own choices independantly, yet if tonight you went out and met a guy/girl (complete stranger) and discovered the man/woman you were to marry, you should recognise that you didn't "choose" for him to be in the place at that particular time in order to meet him..did you?
Sure you might make the decision to marry him/her, but you would never have met in the first place, if the other party hadn't chosen to be where they were when you met them.
So ultimately, while you have control over your life (free will..you chose to go out too) you had no control over the situation occuring.
perhaps this is what is referred to as "fate"

Again, you introduce human relationships/love unbidden....Allow me to venture that that's a stupid argument and one which would only make sense to a naiive romantic with strong faith in such airy concepts as love at first sight. Sure, I won't choose for anybody the pub/club they want to go to tonight, but if i did actually meet somebody tonight and eventually marry them, then that would be as a result of an incalculable amount of choices made by me (and that person) between now and the placing of the ring on finger. Even before I met them I'd have to make a string of choices which would put me in the position to meet them, from this second forward. Which mate to ring, which town to go out in, which pub to go into, what time to go into that pub, where to sit in that pub, who to look at, and that's simplifing the process by a large factor. Each one of those choices would be in turn be influenced by numerous factors including the choices of others, making my appearance in the space beside that person whom the thunderbolt of instant marriage is supposed to strike the combination of so many variables that it would be almost pure chance. Try and distinguish between chance and fate in your mind and then try again to set up some sort of experimental situation in which to demonstrate the hand of fate at work.

keu

Are you seeking to learn this maxim via repetetion?

what maxim do you feel I am seeking to learn dear?

I believe what's under discussion here is the path between those two events.

you mean this is what you believe the discussion is about. YOu have already stated your case, why are you repeating yourself? you don't believe in fate. now, are you setting out to convert everybody else?
you don't believe in "fate" because you have no idea of what the word means.
I suggest you go and find a better definition of it.
Limitations suits me fine and I can interpret how that applies to us.
If you don't ilke the word and what it represent (limitations) write a song about it or something, your boring the **** out of me with your useless idiotic rhetoric.

So why exactly are you posting if you are not prepared to answer the question posed in the topic

I already did.
does fate exists?
subjectively or objectively? subjectively yes, objectivley the effects can be observed in the context of limitations if by definition that is what you consider fate to be.

Allow me to venture that that's a stupid argument and one which would only make sense to a naiive romantic with strong faith in such airy concepts as love at first sight.

your too young and stupid to have any understanding of what love I spose. I never mentioned love at first sight by the way, these are all your own projections.

Even before I met them I'd have to make a string of choices which would put me in the position to meet them, from this second forward. Which mate to ring, which town to go out in, which pub to go into, what time to go into that pub, where to sit in that pub, who to look at, and that's simplifing the process by a large factor. Each one of those choices would be in turn be influenced by numerous factors including the choices of others, making my appearance in the space beside that person whom the thunderbolt of instant marriage is supposed to strike the combination of so many variables that it would be almost pure chance.

i dont know if your blind and reading by brail, you obviously dont get it. I have already stated this does not seclude you from making any decisions, you have to make the choice to get there, but you do not control the lives of others who will influence your own.

Try and distinguish between chance and fate in your mind and then try again to set up some sort of experimental situation in which to demonstrate the hand of fate at work.

ok, last time here, i'm tired of arguing with idiots.
fate is a play on words, what it means to you is subjective. Does it exist was the original question.
you have stated it doesn't. you call it chance, or life, or choice or whatever.

i cannot make excuses for your narrowmindedness in not being able to comprehend useage of another word for all of those things.

....your mommy is calling you sweetheart, wants to read you a bedtime story.
(I'm always amazed at how much can be achieved by insulting others)
*goes off to watch the hands of fate do their stuff*

simu

Originally posted by keu

(I'm always amazed at how much can be achieved by insulting others)

Including a week-long ban for you, keu.

I've stated more than once that I won't accept insults on this forum.

impr0v

Originally posted by keu
what maxim do you feel I am seeking to learn dear?

When making reference to another's post it's common practise to quote a part of their text and then insert one's comment on this portion directly underneath or after it. You've demonstrated repeatedly that you understand and indeed use this protocol, so I'll treat the above as a rhetorical question. And 'dear?' I'm afraid your condescension is wasted on me .

you mean this is what you believe the discussion is about. YOu have already stated your case, why are you repeating yourself? you don't believe in fate. now, are you setting out to convert everybody else?

Ok, so if we aren't discussing how fate, if it exists, applies to a person's life, between point A and B, A being birth and B being death, then we're discussing before A and after B, would that be a fair assumption? But you've repeatedly stated, and I've repeatedly said that I agree with you, that our paths cannot be manipulated pre-birth or after death, we don't choose to be born and most of us don't choose to die. What else to do consider the discussion to apply to?

I'm not repeating myself, I'm attempting to defend my point of view from your repeated attempts to ridicule it.

I wouldn't be so presumptious to think that I could convert everybody to my point of view, nor would I want to, I'm attempting to have a reasoned discussion about it.

you don't believe in "fate" because you have no idea of what the word means.
I suggest you go and find a better definition of it.
Limitations suits me fine and I can interpret how that applies to us.
If you don't ilke the word and what it represent (limitations) write a song about it or something, your boring the **** out of me with your useless idiotic rhetoric.

Do you always sound so agitated when bored? Please forgive my ignorance, and since you disagree with the dictionary definition of the word 'fate' perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify what you think the word means? Your loose concept of limitations? You have yet to provide a lucid definition of exactly what it is you mean by it, apart from applying a quote loosely associating it with power.

Obviously a person is bound by physical limitations, i.e. I can't jump to a height of 30 feet without assistance because of gravity, I can't hear a gunshot before the bullet gets to me because it's supersonic. Are you then referring to societal limitations? Jim's dad drives a dust cart so Jim can't go to Harvard? Biological limitations? Jim has been born with an IQ of 56 so Jim can't go to Harvard? Geographical limitation? Jim was born in a barrio outside Caracas so Jim can't go to Harvard? Set them out and they can be discussed, rather than spouting expletetives.

does fate exists?
subjectively or objectively? subjectively yes, objectivley the effects can be observed in the context of limitations if by definition that is what you consider fate to be.

You do believe in it then? Or fate can be observed as the bits in club orange if you believe fate means the bits in club orange?

your too young and stupid to have any understanding of what love I spose. I never mentioned love at first sight by the way, these are all your own projections.

Perhaps I am, but I'm old enough not to presume to know you, and to be able to express myself without resorting to insults. In my opinion someone who would describe the chain of events you described in your previous post, and someone who talks of 'love' in such a reverential way would be someone who believes in concepts such as love at first sight.

i dont know if your blind and reading by brail, you obviously dont get it. I have already stated this does not seclude you from making any decisions, you have to make the choice to get there, but you do not control the lives of others who will influence your own.

If I was blind and reading by braille, presuming someone had invented a browser capable of rendering text as indentations on the surface of my screen, how would that prevent me from getting 'it'? Instead I contend that it's your unwillingness, or perhaps inability, to articulate your side of the discussion, content as you are to depend on repetetion and ambiguity to get 'it' across.

Obviously I don't control the lives of others, their own choices do, and for them to end up in that location next to me when the wedding bells start clanging is the result of an equally long chain of choices and interactions with other people and their choices. You seem to be claiming fate puts the two of us there under cupids arrow, while also saying we can choose to be there or not, cake and mouthfuls of it.

ok, last time here, i'm tired of arguing with idiots.
fate is a play on words, what it means to you is subjective. Does it exist was the original question.
you have stated it doesn't. you call it chance, or life, or choice or whatever.
i cannot make excuses for your narrowmindedness in not being able to comprehend useage of another word for all of those things.

No, I call chance chance, I call life life and similarly I call choice what it is, choice. If I decide fate means a bottle of club orange, then yes, fate exists because I can go down and buy it in the shop. You can't change the meaning of the word to suit your own purposes, doing so renders language useless and would explain your difficulty in communicating.

....your mommy is calling you sweetheart, wants to read you a bedtime story.
(I'm always amazed at how much can be achieved by insulting others)
*goes off to watch the hands of fate do their stuff*

Again, your condescension is wasted on me. However, I believe you calculated that it wouldn't be wasted on the moderator and utilised this fact to extricate yourself from this discussion in an attempt to save face.