philosophy - fatalism

[popcorn]

i have recently become interested in philosophy and have discovered my beliefs are in line with fatalism. maybe even a mix of fatalism and determinism if there is such a thing. this is new ground for me ive never took an interest before.

is anyone of a similar conviction and could you refer me to any good reading?



thanks :)

 

[WornOutLife]

Some time ago, I was really interested in fatalism and saw my life like that. For example, I didn't want to do anything because I thought it wouldn't matter what I did, my fate would never change.

Now, I don't believe in such things as fate or destiny.

Most of us can change our lives if we really want to.
I tried to ctb last year, failed and I'm still here because I've decided to live again but I'm conscious about the fact that I might ctb someday and fate will have nothing to do with it.
I decide what my future is going to be like.

 

[SuicideTrooper]

I agree with wornOutlife. I used to be very fatalistic and determined to CBT. Now, I know I can decide my own future, that implies I'd still might cbt one day as it would be my preference to do so.

 

[popcorn]

thank you for your inputs, ive also been watching alot of nde videos and such and they all talk about life paths, soul contracts etc which are reinforcing these thoughts.

example; say for instance it was fate that you were to survive your ctb attempt. the whole experience was already planned out



when you decide to pick up a glass of water are you actually doing it or is it just happening? hmmm i think i maybe having symptoms of derealisation

 

[Amumu]

Somehow we're doomed because of our genes and the environment we were born in...

Marx thought the only thing which determined human beings was their environment.

Yet free will is still a thing imo, as explained by the others above.

 

[GenesAndEnvironment]

Fatalism makes no sense, since you could chop the fates up into small pieces and end up with determinism. I'm currently a hard determinist but the whole thing is meta-level and shouldn't affect anyone's actions (not that such an effect is possible in reality ;)

genes and the environment

Based

 

[Imaginos]

Fatalism makes no sense, since you could chop the fates up into small pieces and end up with determinism.

Aren't fatalism and determinism more or less synonymous with each other? Well, either way, freewill is essentially a fantasy. It's a quaint idea that makes most people feel good and endows them with some illusory concept of hope, but that's all it is. The fact that anyone thinks we have any real control over our lives is a cute notion, but also entirely fictional. Our entire lives are basically just one long Rube Goldberg machine. Where one actions leads to the next action which leads to the next action, in a totally fixed and predetermined sequence of events. I for one think that if you could measure all the factors of a person's make-up in relation to their environment, you could predict with perfect accuracy whatever their movements or "decisions" would be. If a person manages to "change", that's only because this change was already established within the parameters of what they were already capable of doing. It didn't just spring out of the ether on its own and, if anything, was just the next step in their already fixed path. I guess you could call this "not knowing" of the path a kind of freewill, but not really. It's more like a fog of war over already established terrain. Whatever is revealed is what one has to work with. That's all there is to it.

The general ideology of our society, or much any other, prizes freewill because it makes those with decent lives feel special in the belief that it was all thanks to their hard efforts for bringing what it is they're enjoying about, when really they were just sitting on a fixed track like a ride at an amusement park and totally fluked out with getting a pleasing ride. Freewill is also a kind of religion in a sense that it claims that any and everyone is capable of being saved so long as they "try hard enough", but this simply isn't true. Most people would be crushed by the truth, so they cling to hopeful bedtime stories instead and, given how crappy the truth is, I guess I can't blame them.

 

[popcorn]

Aren't fatalism and determinism more or less synonymous with each other? Well, either way, freewill is essentially a fantasy. It's a quaint idea that makes most people feel good and endows them with some illusory concept of hope, but that's all it is. The fact that anyone thinks we have any real control over our lives is a cute notion, but also entirely fictional. Our entire lives are basically just one long Rube Goldberg machine. Where one actions leads to the next action which leads to the next action, in a totally fixed and predetermined sequence of events. I for one think that if you could measure all the factors of a person's make-up in relation to their environment, you could predict with perfect accuracy whatever their movements or "decisions" would be. If a person manages to "change", that's only because this change was already established within the parameters of what they were already capable of doing. It didn't just spring out of the ether on its own and, if anything, was just the next step in their already fixed path. I guess you could call this "not knowing" of the path a kind of freewill, but not really. It's more like a fog of war over already established terrain. Whatever is revealed is what one has to work with. That's all there is to it.

The general ideology of our society, or much any other, prizes freewill because it makes those with decent lives feel special in the belief that it was all thanks to their hard efforts for bringing what it is they're enjoying about, when really they were just sitting on a fixed track like a ride at an amusement park and totally fluked out with getting a pleasing ride. Freewill is also a kind of religion in a sense that it claims that any and everyone is capable of being saved so long as they "try hard enough", but this simply isn't true. Most people would be crushed by the truth, so they cling to hopeful bedtime stories instead and, given how crappy the truth is, I guess I can't blame them.

View attachment 63153

this is more or less exactly where my head is at, im glad im not the only one to think these things

re your question;

In short, fatalism is the theory that there is some destiny that we cannot avoid, although we are able to take different paths up to this destiny. ... Determinism, however, is the theory that the entire path of our life is decided by earlier events and actions. So very slight difference

 

[Amumu]

Aren't fatalism and determinism more or less synonymous with each other? Well, either way, freewill is essentially a fantasy. It's a quaint idea that makes most people feel good and endows them with some illusory concept of hope, but that's all it is. The fact that anyone thinks we have any real control over our lives is a cute notion, but also entirely fictional. Our entire lives are basically just one long Rube Goldberg machine. Where one actions leads to the next action which leads to the next action, in a totally fixed and predetermined sequence of events. I for one think that if you could measure all the factors of a person's make-up in relation to their environment, you could predict with perfect accuracy whatever their movements or "decisions" would be. If a person manages to "change", that's only because this change was already established within the parameters of what they were already capable of doing. It didn't just spring out of the ether on its own and, if anything, was just the next step in their already fixed path. I guess you could call this "not knowing" of the path a kind of freewill, but not really. It's more like a fog of war over already established terrain. Whatever is revealed is what one has to work with. That's all there is to it.

The general ideology of our society, or much any other, prizes freewill because it makes those with decent lives feel special in the belief that it was all thanks to their hard efforts for bringing what it is they're enjoying about, when really they were just sitting on a fixed track like a ride at an amusement park and totally fluked out with getting a pleasing ride. Freewill is also a kind of religion in a sense that it claims that any and everyone is capable of being saved so long as they "try hard enough", but this simply isn't true. Most people would be crushed by the truth, so they cling to hopeful bedtime stories instead and, given how crappy the truth is, I guess I can't blame them.

View attachment 63153

To understand the other position, see I. Kant. According to him, free will is a condition of morality.
There are a lot of implications if we remove it entirely.

 

[Imaginos]

In short, fatalism is the theory that there is some destiny that we cannot avoid, although we are able to take different paths up to this destiny. ... Determinism, however, is the theory that the entire path of our life is decided by earlier events and actions. So very slight difference

Ah, I see. The only thing I really knew about fatalism was what the name implies, so thanks for taking the time to briefly delineate what it actually entails. So, in other words, whichever arbitrary path you choose will inevitably lead you to the same fated destination. You might have freewill over this or that inconsequential decision, but everything else that constitutes fundamental and spontaneous change is essentially beyond your control, unless that change is already fated to happen. In that case, I'd certainly lean more on the side of determinism. Even the most split second decisions rely on subconscious processes which are entirely outside of our control. When it comes down to it, we're basically just elaborate wind-up toys.

According to him, free will is a condition of morality. There are a lot of implications if we remove it entirely.

Yeah, I think I've heard about what you mean. Without freewill as an agreed upon concept, then how could anyone ever be punished for their actions? If we're all just predetermined creatures doomed to carry out whatever our immutable paths through life might be, then even the harshest crimes become something to be dismissed on the basis that the person committing them had no other choice in the matter. However, I personally think that even though a person might be predetermined to be psychopathic and their following crimes also predetermined, the punishment for said crimes are also predetermined and it really should just be seen as another predetermined part of the whole affair so, at least on that basis, I don't really see the conflict. Just because freewill doesn't exist, doesn't mean society shouldn't still have laws, rules, and other forms of conduct that encourage peace and safety for its citizens.

 

[GenesAndEnvironment]

Yeah, I think I've heard about what you mean. Without freewill as an agreed upon concept, then how could anyone ever be punished for their actions? If we're all just predetermined creatures doomed to carry out whatever our immutable paths through life might be, then even the harshest crimes become something to be dismissed on the basis that the person committing them had no other choice in the matter. However, I personally think that even though a person might be predetermined to be psychopathic and their following crimes also predetermined, the punishment for said crimes are also predetermined and it really should just be seen as another predetermined part of the whole affair so, at least on that basis, I don't really see the conflict. Just because freewill doesn't exist, doesn't mean society shouldn't still have laws, rules, and other forms of conduct that encourage peace and safety for its citizens.

Great example of what I meant by it being too meta-level to have any "effect".