Implications Of Fatalism

[Sleeppy]

1) Is fatalism compatible with your religion, or worldview?


a) If so, where does it lead?

b) If not, where is it incompatible?


2) Assuming fatalism is correct, and becomes accepted worldwide- would anything change? What specifically?

 

[David T]

1) Is fatalism compatible with your religion, or worldview?


a) If so, where does it lead?

b) If not, where is it incompatible?


2) Assuming fatalism is correct, and becomes accepted worldwide- would anything change? What specifically?

Jung said, until the unconscious becomes conscious everything is fate. So no to your question because it is not clarity. Fatalism is we are going to die. Clarity is nature alive. It's your text Christian. What did you think jesus was talking about the twilight zone? If I am in the twilight zone then yes you are correct it makes complete sense. Out in nature not at all ALIVE!!! we face the great turn coming up fast, which do you choose nature dead, or nature alive? Choose nature dead and you have not spit the apple out of your mouth. Keep chewing it leads to man's fate, extinction, complete.

 

[Sleeppy]

Jung said, until the unconscious becomes conscious everything is fate. So no to your question because it is not clarity. Fatalism is we are going to die. Clarity is nature alive. It's your text Christian. What did you think jesus was talking about the twilight zone? If I am in the twilight zone then yes you are correct it makes complete sense. Out in nature not at all ALIVE!!! we face the great turn coming up fast, which do you choose nature dead, or nature alive? Choose nature dead and you have not spit the apple out of your mouth. Keep chewing it leads to man's fate, extinction, complete.

Are you going to die?

 

[shunyadragon]

Are you going to die?

Everyone is going to die.

 

[shunyadragon]

The problem with addressing the question of fatalism is that it is not a yes or no issue. There are a number versions of fatalism. It ranges from the simple natural fatalism based on natural determinism to Christian fatalism based on scripture by Calvinist, Jewish and Islamic fatalism, and proposed by Martin Luther and Alvin Plantinga. Some, but not many, equate a sense of hopelessness and possible despair that everything we do has no meaning,

I personally think the 'word' fatalism is out dated and many other philosophical and theological terms address this better, and of course using fatalism in the context of the philosophy or theology that meaningfully applies.

 

[Sleeppy]

The problem with addressing the question of fatalism is that it is not a yes or no issue. There are a number versions of fatalism. It ranges from the simple natural fatalism based on natural determinism to Christian fatalism based on scripture by Calvinist, Jewish and Islamic fatalism, and proposed by Martin Luther and Alvin Plantinga. Some, but not many, equate a sense of hopelessness and possible despair that everything we do has no meaning,

I personally think the 'word' fatalism is out dated and many other philosophical and theological terms address this better, and of course using fatalism in the context of the philosophy or theology that meaningfully applies.

Feel free to speak to any version.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I feel we can only change a few details, but the overall gist is scripted.

 

[shunyadragon]

Actually, if fatalism is taken in the context of natural determinism there is good science that our existence is determined by natural laws, the nature of our physical existence, human nature including our will. There is no basis in the evidence for the extreme alternative of libertarian free will. I have addressed this in other threads, but here is a reasonable place to continue the discussion. I do not favor religious arguments for either determinism (fatalism) nor libertarian free will, because they are based on religious presuppositions and not the actual evidence.

This discussion is intertwined in the nature of human consciousness and the mind.

I advocate compatabilism that acknowledges the evidence for the foundation of determinism, but in various ways free will exists as I believe may be described as 'potential free will.' Dennett provided an argument concerning the nature of human will as possible 'wiggle room' in the chain of cause and effect in human choice.

 

[Quintessence]

I don't fancy the term "fatalism," but the general idea of "things are as they must be" has been part of my worldview/religion ever since I became learned enough to see the flaws in the alternative narratives I was introduced to as a child. Accepting that things are as they are doesn't lead anywhere in particular - it can lead to many different things. I think that's important to remember. Sometimes, folks assume that because a person embraces a particular ideology, there's some linear or surefire result of that. In practice, the way in which the idea functions in a person's life and expresses itself varies.

For me, it's really about honoring and appreciating things for what they are instead of constantly demanding (or wanting) them to be something else. There's a serenity and peace in that, as well as a humility in not expecting the universe to conform to your vision of it.

 

[Sleeppy]

For me, it's really about honoring and appreciating things for what they are instead of constantly demanding (or wanting) them to be something else. There's a serenity and peace in that, as well as a humility in not expecting the universe to conform to your vision of it.

I agree. There is peace in it, but only after the humility.

I understand the counterargument is often that there is instead helplessness, and thereby demoralization.

To accept fatalism to the degree that I have, I must agree with both; a sufficient humility can provide serenity in fatalism, and an insufficiency can only provide the adverse.

I experience both serenity and demoralization. I am a pacifist because of fatalism, but it is often a demoralizing position in relation to social norm.

 

[shunyadragon]

I alluded and described the scientific side of the discussion concerning the nature of determinism, and the uselessness of religious claims.

I share one of the Buddhist and some Vedic beliefs perspective that is indifferent to determinism (fatalism) that our acts and decisions are neutral as to whether they are pre-determined or a product of free will, because 'deciding yes or no is to be immobile on two feet.' (paraphrased from the Gita).

Freedom is the release from the burden or suffering of deciding either way.

 

[Nakosis]

1) Is fatalism compatible with your religion, or worldview?

Sure, fatalism is only an explanation of why things are the way they are.

a) If so, where does it lead?

Right here, tomorrow, the next day. Whatever the state of the world happens to be according to fatalism, it couldn't have been anything different.

b) If not, where is it incompatible?

It'd only be incompatible with abstract ideas of what the world should be. Some idea in your head that the world could have been different than it is.

The world being as it is, fits perfectly with fatalism.

2) Assuming fatalism is correct, and becomes accepted worldwide- would anything change? What specifically?

It couldn't. Fatalism says the world has to be as it is. It couldn't change from that.