Philosophy of Fate/Destiny/Predeterminism

[Excubis]

First off I know the difference between these and am not looking for the divine in fate/destiny but how fate/destiny in theism is valid in atheistic predeterminism. Now many atheist do not accept predeterminism but yet it holds valid in the scientific method.

Another point, many claim credence to theist leaders by prophecy so therefore fate/destiny or divine credence to authority. "God choose me and this is my destiny" is one of many claims but yet here is my question, since there are many people who claim such, isn't this just a mathematical inevitability that some will accomplish greatness?

So do you see any credence to predeterminism as an atheist not by means of divine action but fixed mathematical values and subsequent measurable interacting forces, or is the calculation too large with an inability to know all values and therefore moot.

For the theist, why do many cross faith leaders claim such(or followers claim), if monotheism was true would there only be 1 faith. How could so many accomplish so much while doing so and claiming divine inspiration, in monotheism only 1 can be true?

[Divine Insight]

Now many atheist do not accept predeterminism but yet it holds valid in the scientific method.

Why do you say that it holds valid in the scientific method? Not according to modern science it doesn't. Predeterminism was lost when Quantum Mechanics was discovered. And this blew the mind of Albert Einstein. He never did accept QM because of this. But QM has become a main pillar of modern science.

So to say that predeterminism "holds valid" in the scientific method seems to be incompatible with modern science. That may have been the case during the "Classical Physic Era", but I don't think it "holds valid" today in modern physics.

So do you see any credence to predeterminism as an atheist not by means of divine action but fixed mathematical values and subsequent measurable interacting forces, or is the calculation too large with an inability to know all values and therefore moot.

It's not a matter of the calculation merely being too large. It's a matter of the uncertainty principle preventing predeterminism from being valid into the far future.

Just how far into the future predeterminism can "reach" depends on the size and complexity of the "Macro System". A "Macro System" (i.e. any system large enough where quantum uncertainty is very small) can be predetermined for quite a long time into the future, be even it will eventually give way to quantum uncertainty given enough time.

However, on the quantum level predeterminism evaporates very quickly.

~~~~

Another thing to realize is that most of our brain activity is due to electromagnetic phenomena which are at the quantum level. (i.e. photos, the carrier of the electromagnetic force are themselves quantum particles). Therefore it's reasonable to suggest that our very thoughts and choices may not be predetermined at all. Or at least if they are predetermined, they may not be predetermined very far into the future.

~~~~

However, Buddhism offers a very compelling explanation of how it can be possible to control our own fate extremely far into the future. This explanation of Buddhism is completely compatible with Quantum Mechanics as well.

The idea of Buddhism is to control each and every one of our thoughts and choices. This has the effect of "extending" our quantum control over thoughts by purposefully making sure that our "macro thoughts" are engaged and driving our quantum thoughts.

Of course, Buddhism doesn't explain this in terms of Quantum Mechanics. They simply explain it in terms of learning to pay attention to your thoughts and now allowing them to be "blown around by the wind". And you do this simply by paying attention to them (i.e. purposeful mediation). Otherwise, if you don't pay "macro attention" to them they are no longer guided by your macro mind, and end up becoming "spontaneous" in the quantum domain. You lose the ability to control your long term "destiny".

This can even be seen without even thinking of Buddhism. Just realize that when you are mentally "focused" on a long-term goal, you keep your thoughts trained on that goal until you have achieved it. In other words, you "meditate" on that goal. You keep it in the forefront of your attention.

If you fail to do this and become constantly distracted by other things, then your "destiny" become a destiny that is blown about like dust in the wind.

So the philosophy of Buddhism (even without the eternal soul bit) actually makes sense concerning what we know know about the properties of the macro and quantum world and how we can best control a long-term destiny.

All of this is actually quite obvious, apparent, and practical if you stop and think about it.

Focusing on a long-term goal would cause that destiny to become manifest. Not having a long-term goal and just doing whatever strikes you in the moment will cause you "destiny" to become random.

You still have a "destiny" in both cases. Just in one case you have more control over it than in the other.

[Psalm139]

Now many atheist do not accept predeterminism but yet it holds valid in the scientific method.

Why do you say that it holds valid in the scientific method? Not according to modern science it doesn't. Predeterminism was lost when Quantum Mechanics was discovered. And this blew the mind of Albert Einstein. He never did accept QM because of this. But QM has become a main pillar of modern science.

So to say that predeterminism "holds valid" in the scientific method seems to be incompatible with modern science. That may have been the case during the "Classical Physic Era", but I don't think it "holds valid" today in modern physics.

So do you see any credence to predeterminism as an atheist not by means of divine action but fixed mathematical values and subsequent measurable interacting forces, or is the calculation too large with an inability to know all values and therefore moot.

It's not a matter of the calculation merely being too large. It's a matter of the uncertainty principle preventing predeterminism from being valid into the far future.

Just how far into the future predeterminism can "reach" depends on the size and complexity of the "Macro System". A "Macro System" (i.e. any system large enough where quantum uncertainty is very small) can be predetermined for quite a long time into the future, be even it will eventually give way to quantum uncertainty given enough time.

However, on the quantum level predeterminism evaporates very quickly.

~~~~

Another thing to realize is that most of our brain activity is due to electromagnetic phenomena which are at the quantum level. (i.e. photos, the carrier of the electromagnetic force are themselves quantum particles). Therefore it's reasonable to suggest that our very thoughts and choices may not be predetermined at all. Or at least if they are predetermined, they may not be predetermined very far into the future.

~~~~

However, Buddhism offers a very compelling explanation of how it can be possible to control our own fate extremely far into the future. This explanation of Buddhism is completely compatible with Quantum Mechanics as well.

The idea of Buddhism is to control each and every one of our thoughts and choices. This has the effect of "extending" our quantum control over thoughts by purposefully making sure that our "macro thoughts" are engaged and driving our quantum thoughts.

Of course, Buddhism doesn't explain this in terms of Quantum Mechanics. They simply explain it in terms of learning to pay attention to your thoughts and now allowing them to be "blown around by the wind". And you do this simply by paying attention to them (i.e. purposeful mediation). Otherwise, if you don't pay "macro attention" to them they are no longer guided by your macro mind, and end up becoming "spontaneous" in the quantum domain. You lose the ability to control your long term "destiny".

This can even be seen without even thinking of Buddhism. Just realize that when you are mentally "focused" on a long-term goal, you keep your thoughts trained on that goal until you have achieved it. In other words, you "meditate" on that goal. You keep it in the forefront of your attention.

If you fail to do this and become constantly distracted by other things, then your "destiny" become a destiny that is blown about like dust in the wind.

So the philosophy of Buddhism (even without the eternal soul bit) actually makes sense concerning what we know know about the properties of the macro and quantum world and how we can best control a long-term destiny.

All of this is actually quite obvious, apparent, and practical if you stop and think about it.

Focusing on a long-term goal would cause that destiny to become manifest. Not having a long-term goal and just doing whatever strikes you in the moment will cause you "destiny" to become random.

You still have a "destiny" in both cases. Just in one case you have more control over it than in the other.

God made is in a way where we think we have control but we always live according to His will ( which means His plan ).

[Mr.Badham]

[Replying to Excubis]

I don't see why I wouldn't be able to avoid a fate if it was described to me in enough detail in enough time.

"You will be involved in a car accident tomorrow at 5:00." I can see no reason why I wouldn't be able to avoid that situation.

[Psalm139]

First off I know the difference between these and am not looking for the divine in fate/destiny but how fate/destiny in theism is valid in atheistic predeterminism. Now many atheist do not accept predeterminism but yet it holds valid in the scientific method.

Another point, many claim credence to theist leaders by prophecy so therefore fate/destiny or divine credence to authority. "God choose me and this is my destiny" is one of many claims but yet here is my question, since there are many people who claim such, isn't this just a mathematical inevitability that some will accomplish greatness?

So do you see any credence to predeterminism as an atheist not by means of divine action but fixed mathematical values and subsequent measurable interacting forces, or is the calculation too large with an inability to know all values and therefore moot.

For the theist, why do many cross faith leaders claim such(or followers claim), if monotheism was true would there only be 1 faith. How could so many accomplish so much while doing so and claiming divine inspiration, in monotheism only 1 can be true?

I wonder what the first people on this earth wondered about without any mathematics to build the objects that formed in their minds from the mind of our Creator. There is plenty of evidence on cave walls that they were getting images in their minds to draw. Where did those images come from?

[Psalm139]

[Replying to Excubis]

I don't see why I wouldn't be able to avoid a fate if it was described to me in enough detail in enough time.

"You will be involved in a car accident tomorrow at 5:00." I can see no reason why I wouldn't be able to avoid that situation.

That's why God doesn't give us the exact date of when we'll be killed, although He has told me why, how and where I'll be killed for testifying to His knowledge of the past 7 years.

[Excubis]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

Well we have a different understanding of the uncertainty principle. The principle of uncertainty means that complimentary know physical parameters can be known simultaneously and therefore precision of either position or movement is moot in comparison to same exact event. This indicates that impossibilities such as spontaneous creation on a quantum level can occur. Now in QM this variable of uncertainty is theorized as multi-verse and is the source for the variable interacting force and if observable could very well be quantified and therefore calculated. Either QM and GR are both trying to measure all interacting variables, and therefore attempting to calculate all possible interactions. A major pillar of QM is that all things are quantifiable (smallest part can be measured) the difference is QM is applied uncertainty, this means even though A generally happens everso often you will get a B,C,D ect.... this is dependant on energy available, if a phenomena that needs energy occurs in another verse our verse will experience a different result since energy is accepted to be shared throughout the multi verse. Guess my point is that QM is still attempting to measure and calculate all observable forces and therefore preditermism hold trues for it's pursuit. I personally do not hold to predeterminism when speaking on human behavior, the variables are too uncertain and therefore moot.

[Neatras]

I wonder what the first people on this earth wondered about without any mathematics to build the objects that formed in their minds from the mind of our Creator. There is plenty of evidence on cave walls that they were getting images in their minds to draw. Where did those images come from?

What's interesting about this is, while the likely answer is it's a matter of their imagination and creativeness taking hold and compelling them to act on it, there are thousands of increasingly less likely answers. It could've been beamed into their heads by aliens, it could've spontaneously popped into ones' head when he fell over and bumped his noggin on his pet rock. A lightning bolt could've struck and formed a pattern in the grass out of fire that an onlooker could see as an image. On and on this list can go... And somewhere on the spectrum is "God did it". I'll leave it up to you to tell me whether it's more or less likely for a person to be imaginative rather than have a deity beam images into their head.