Author Topic: My thoughts on Fatalism  (Read 110 times)

Kapalika

My thoughts on Fatalism
« on: November 15, 2017, 04:16:14 am »
Who are we to say we do not have a destiny? There isn't any compelling evidence I've ever seen for "free will" and I think all relevant scientific study suggests a deterministic bent to our inherent nature.

Now, I am not so extreme that I would believe in, or argue for determinism. Technically the term for what I believe is "soft determinism" wherein the world is largely deterministic, and we are limited in choice by either our own nature, environmental constraints or pure chance.

In the same way I can't just will myself to run faster than the fastest man in the world, I can't will myself to do something magical, mental or spiritual way beyond my potential current or otherwise.

I would argue that, ultimately, we have only one primary choice in our life: To embrace or deny our destiny.

The funny thing about destiny is that you don't know it until it's happening. Crowley spoke of "true will" as "orbits". Orbits are stable, definite. Yes they do oscillate in distance from the center of mass but where they will be and are is fully deterministic. Crowley I suspect saw it as "falling into" one's orbit, to be where one 'should be.' More or less similar to the ancient idea of destiny.

To Embrace, to accept where you should be, where you would be happy being or where you were "meant" to be. Only an individual can say what and where this is. Funny enough, in a paradoxical way one's destiny might be to deny what appeared to be their destiny, thereby fulfilling it.

That isn't the same though as denying one's destiny. Denying one's destiny will make one miserable, unless being miserable of course was somehow a component of their destiny. I think the distinction between rejected and accepted actually comes down to the proactive involvement of one's self in the pursuit of their personal fulfillment in life.

Yes, I understand people here often believe we have this will that is exerted, as if to forge one's own destiny. I would argue that isn't what is going on, but that those forces are used in the discovery of one's path.

After all... what is DESTINy if not DESTINation? I don't believe the destination is chosen, just the decision to go down that path or not. That destination in my view is determined by one's inner true self but discovered and achieved by magical/spiritual ect means.
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

pi_ramesses

Re: My thoughts on Fatalism
« Reply #1 on: November 15, 2017, 05:45:54 am »
Interesting perspective @Kapalika. It is different conceptions such as this this that we would like to hear more about from others. I find it interesting that soft determinism can account for the agency of the agent as well as destiny.
Pro omnis dominos viae sinistra, sic itur ad astra
Nylfmedli14

Liu

Re: My thoughts on Fatalism
« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2017, 01:05:44 pm »
I believe in determinism, and all explanations of soft-determinism I found so far didn't really convince me. Yours doesn't differ in that regard. But maybe you can still convince me otherwise.

To explain my position: The whole of existence - including both the "objective" part of matter/energy/space and the "subjective" parts of mind and awareness - can be considered to consist of a gigantic amount of states of being which interact by the laws of cause and effect. If the same situation should ever occur twice, and all aspects of it are identical to the previous time, then also the outcome will be the same.*

Of course one's "destiny" or rather destination does also depend on one's own decisions. However, those decisions are based on in parts the circumstances, in parts one's own state of being. Even if one can change one's state of being, even the decision to do so would be caused by one's previous state of being, leading to a sort of loop mechanism.

From a psychological point of view, it certainly can be helpful to embrace one's destiny, so to speak. But one is basically fated to embrace it or not. And even if one doesn't embrace it, even this non-embracing of it is part of one's destiny.

_____
*There are theories regarding quantum physics that imply that this wouldn't be the case, but they don't seem proven yet, or I at least didn't understand yet how they would proof it.

Cabshear

Re: My thoughts on Fatalism
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2017, 12:26:39 pm »
The term for this would be Amor Fati, for the love of fate. Used by Nietzsche in his writings, it would also fall in line with that of the Stoics, along with one of my favorites, Memento Mori.

The idea is to not fight against the things that happen in life, whether for good or ill. The idea of this seems to frustrate me a bit, I guess an indicator of a weakness in myself I should examine.

As things arise, whether for good or for bad, they are not to be nessessarily fought against. Maybe struggled with to unfold a further transformation of the self. The struggle of initiation? Runa, the mystery of Reality and Life?

My weakness thus would be one of Control. The accepting of "fate" seems to be a "bend over and take it with a smile" approach. A weakness possibly born from sections of TSB where a Satanist doesn't sit back and just accept fate or God's hand in the matter. Positive thinking and Positive action leads to results. Old forms of emotive logic arise in my mind. If all is determined then it matters not what we do or don't do. The cold grip of existential crisis tightens and the saving grace of hedonistic enjoyment becomes more appealing. I see this alot in our current culture.

I guess this is what drew me away from both Buddhist dharma and Stoicism. Shit happens, it's all determined, we are all gonna die, pass me an ice cold Beer a good pizza and maybe I'll tell that girl at work how I feel about her lol
I say: liberate yourself as far as you can, and you have done your part; for it is not given to every one to break through all limits, or, more expressively, not to everyone is that a limit which is a limit for the rest. - Max Stirner, The Ego and it's Own

King Mob

Re: My thoughts on Fatalism
« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2017, 01:16:21 pm »
I need to find my Memento Mori necklace :( I mean, I'm not gonna lie; I partially wear it because I dress edgey (in a fashionable way) and I like wearing a human tooth necklace. But more-over, it can be good for magickal use and I like a reminder that the physical body dies as it subconciously directs me to achieve immortality via other means.
"Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me."- Nuit, Book of the Law.

Olive

Re: My thoughts on Fatalism
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2017, 11:22:33 am »
To explain my position: The whole of existence - including both the "objective" part of matter/energy/space and the "subjective" parts of mind and awareness - can be considered to consist of a gigantic amount of states of being which interact by the laws of cause and effect. If the same situation should ever occur twice, and all aspects of it are identical to the previous time, then also the outcome will be the same.*
_____
*There are theories regarding quantum physics that imply that this wouldn't be the case, but they don't seem proven yet, or I at least didn't understand yet how they would proof it.

It's not really just theory - randomness is inherent in quantum mechanics. Determinism takes the attitude that everything in the future would be perfectly predictable if one had perfect knowledge of the starting conditions. This seems possible in principle but not in practice. But when you get to quantum mechanics, it shows you that perfect knowledge of the initial conditions is not possible even in principle.

Another thing that is often overlooked within deterministic thought is the possibility that reality is beginningless. If this is the case, there would truly be no initial conditions to know and calculate from. I tend to believe that this is the nature of things, and it can be shown to be true through rational proofs and further supplemented by other methods. If existence is beginningless, you can try to say that if you had perfect knowledge of everything that existed everywhere, you could then calculate the exact future. But this statement doesn't grasp the full nature of infinity - how far it reaches beyond all we see and know, how it contains aspects and realities that are far different from the one we do all of our predicting within. With that taken into account, all you can really say is that if you were God (to use a word), you could know everything everywhere by being it, and thus perfectly predict the future. In which case, sure; but it is not a very meaningful statement or position to hold.

Despite these things, I still subscribe to a form of Fatalism. One must understand that time is only a dimension in the infinitude of this reality. This means that the past, present, and even the future exist right now, in definite form, as being. Time does not describe and prescribe the All, it is within the All. This must be the case. From within time, we say that things have arisen, are now, and will fall away. Things are new in every moment. But from without, reality is eternal, self-satisfying, and unchanged - for all time and beyond time.

This stuff is a little transcendental, and I'm not asking you to believe it at face value. But I have experienced it; I'm sure some others here have glimpsed this somewhere along their path.

That being said, does it matter? Haha, absolutely not! Why are people so concerned with thinking that our decisions must influence reality itself at the highest level? Or that we must find and walk the 'pre-ordained' path that was set for us by God. You just create mental blockages for yourself either way with that. You do not have "free will." You have Volition. And that is enough.

Just my take on it guys.  ;)

Liu

Re: My thoughts on Fatalism
« Reply #6 on: December 11, 2017, 12:00:53 pm »
It's not really just theory - randomness is inherent in quantum mechanics. Determinism takes the attitude that everything in the future would be perfectly predictable if one had perfect knowledge of the starting conditions. This seems possible in principle but not in practice. But when you get to quantum mechanics, it shows you that perfect knowledge of the initial conditions is not possible even in principle.
I agree that perfect knowledge of the conditions is not possible - but that doesn't seem to me to prove that there would be true randomness involved.
Just because it's impossible to find out what causes something doesn't mean it's without cause.

Quote
Another thing that is often overlooked within deterministic thought is the possibility that reality is beginningless. If this is the case, there would truly be no initial conditions to know and calculate from. I tend to believe that this is the nature of things, and it can be shown to be true through rational proofs and further supplemented by other methods. If existence is beginningless, you can try to say that if you had perfect knowledge of everything that existed everywhere, you could then calculate the exact future. But this statement doesn't grasp the full nature of infinity - how far it reaches beyond all we see and know, how it contains aspects and realities that are far different from the one we do all of our predicting within. With that taken into account, all you can really say is that if you were God (to use a word), you could know everything everywhere by being it, and thus perfectly predict the future. In which case, sure; but it is not a very meaningful statement or position to hold.
For most practical purposes you are right. But we were talking about metaphysics here, not about practicability. If it were about real-life applicability then I'd agree it to be more helpful to act as if one actually has a free will.