Goldenarticles articles

What is destiny? is there some thing called free will? - thinking


One of the best and ceaseless debates of humanity has been about the role of fate in the lives of human beings. There was a time when it was just about an established fact of life that each and every event was governed by future of human beings. Astrology was measured a science. Then with the arrival of current times the consequence of role of lot as a idea happening bringing up the rear weight. Today, belief in fortune is well thought-out a false notion by adulthood of people. And rightly so, since there seems to be no demonstrate for the irrevocability of destiny.

There are three schools of feelings about fate. The most prevalent these days seems to be the one which says that there is naught called fate or fate. This line of accepted wisdom says that human beings do possess free will. All our successes, failures and procedures are governed by the decisions we take. If we take adjust decisions and act accordingly, no one can check us from achieving what we want to. If we fail, it must be due to a little wrong on our part. We have the decision to take decisions using our free will. In this line of thinking, fate is measured a fallacy at worst and at best one can affection it as a psychological cover arrangement to cope with the failures in life. At any time you fail in some attempt or at whatever time a touch happens which is not in accordance of your wish, you use it as a expedient scapegoat. You say, it was your bad luck which caused you to fail. Otherwise, how could you fail? You are never ready to agree to that it was you who was conscientious for the failure. It may have been due to some bad planning, lack of pains in the right command or outright closure to exactly judge the realities of your goal. But since it hurts to admit that you were the one who committed the mistake, you take shelter after the belief of fate and blame it on your karma. This relieves you of the terrible pain of calculating and accommodating the defeat.

This line of belief has gained currency essentially for the reason that of the personnel who subscribe to this theory. Among the votaries of this theory, one will barely ever find ancestors who can be called a catastrophe in their lives. More or less all of the associates who are well thought-out as flourishing in their lives agree with this line of thinking. They say there is nobody called fate, they have faith in in themselves and in the being of free will. Other people, looking at the supporters of this theory, resentfully start patient it since the logic, that one must be right if he is successful, comes into play.

This concept foliage many a questions of life unanswered. For example, this guess does not even begin to key the difficulty of differences concerning another colonize at the point of their birth. Why one is born to rich parents and a new to poor ones? Why are some family born good for you and some sick or crippled in some way? There are many such questions, but for starters such questions suffice. Apart from contribution the word "Coincidence", it has no credible sounding answers. There can be many influence for and adjacent to this theory, but the argue is bound to linger inconclusive.

It must be said at this point that once a doing well person, who does not consider in destiny, starts experiencing failures, he at a snail's pace begins to admit the life of fate. Perhaps, the experiences of associates are the strongest influence in favor of destiny.

There is a new drill of belief which seems to be the most commonsensical line of thinking. It says you are free to take the first step, but as soon as you take it, your back up step becomes inevitable and predictable. You develop into bound by the atypical laws of life which govern the outcome of an act. Let us take an example. Say, you are going to plant a tree. As long as you have not done it, you have adequate of options. You may decide not to plant the seed at all. You may elect the type of tree you wish to grow. But once you have taken that assessment and acted upon it, your candor is cut by many degrees. If you plant a mango tree, then no be important what you do you cannot get any other fruit from that tree. Of course, even for reaping the collect of mangoes you have to keep you fingers crossed. You cannot agreement that the seed you just planted will grow to a big tree at all. It may also come to pass that the tree grows, bears fruit, but you cannot taste even a distinct fruit. There might be adequate of reasons for this. In other words, your abandon is inadequate to the events you take but not to the outcome of that act. This sounds commonsense since the outcome of any act depends on so many factors that one cannot believably hope to have be in charge of over all those factors. That is why even the best laid plans of the mightiest and most bright ancestors turn to dust. This hypothesis is called "Law of Karma".

In the eastern philosophies, like Hindu or Buddhist philosophy, there is the idea of reincarnation. It says, we all keep captivating birth after birth. This cycle of birth and death has been long-lasting since eternity, and will keep on repeating itself till a human being attains "Enlightenment". This state of enlightenment has been described in your own way by atypical sages. Some have called it Self-Realization, some have called it Self-Actualization. It is also known as attaining Moksha, Heaven or Kaivalya. Only after one achieves it, one can break out of this insistent cycle of birth and death.

The law of Karma says that all that happens in one's life is answer of his own deeds. One can never avoid the fruits of anything he has done. Just like atypical plants take altered time spans to grow up, atypical dealings also take atypical time spans to bear fruit. It may be that the consequence of some act may take more time to fructify than the left behind life span of the character who committed that act. In such cases, the character has to bear the fallout of such procedures in his next life.

Now we come to the conjecture which says that all actions are predestined. There is nonentity called free will. We are all like instruments in some grand blueprint and naught else. All our feelings and dealings are predestined. I would give two opinion in favor of this theory.

Let us first appraise the area under discussion of Astrology. It has also been a business of a great and indecisive debate. Is there some truth in the astrological sciences( see Astrology: A Knowledge or Superstition)? I think that while it is not feasible to confirm the effectiveness of Astrology ahead of any doubt, it is maybe more challenging to deny it altogether. Most of us have had some be subjected to with astrologers where some of their predictions came out to be amazingly accurate. It can be argued that a best part of astrological predictions fail. But I am not discussion of botched predictions. There can be many reasons for that. I am focusing on the predictions which turn out to be true. How can it be feasible for a big shot to predict some event of future?

Let us believe for a instant a journey from one place to another. A big name who knows the route can tell us that city A will come after city B. Now it is only likely if the landscape carcass unchangeable. If a big cheese can adjust the scene of cities then it would be awkward to predict this order. Similarly, the very fact that it is at all likely to predict forthcoming events, proves that expectations is unchangeable. And if it is so, then where is the place for free will?

The be with contention derives itself from the acquaintance of current science. It says that the whole universe is a continuum. What this means is that there is no part of the universe which is lonely from other parts. Doesn't matter what happens in one part of the universe influences the whole of it. This bring about might not be detectable, but that it occurs cannot be denied. For example, if I throw a nugget in the Calm Ocean then the disturbance it will conceive is bound to pass through to the other end of the ocean and concern the water molecules there. It is completely an added be of importance whether we are accomplished of measuring that appearance or not. Similarly, take the case of stars billions of light years away from us. Since the light from those stars in due course reaches us, it must be influencing us in some way or the other. We also absorb that for any event to take place there must be many dealings in the past which make this event possible. Each event is a conclusion of inestimable measures in the past as well as harbinger of some other event in the future. For example, for me to have taken birth the births of my parents was a compulsory condition and so on. If we start tracing back the turn of dealings which made my birth possible, we will have to go back to the very establishment of the universe. Now let us believe the triviality of a human being in the conspire of the universe. Even a drop of water in the chief ocean has more hefty apparition in the environment of that ocean than a human being has in the universe. What this signifies is that it is impracticable for a man to adjust the course of action of events, since the causes of those actions lie not in his area but in the whole of the past of the universe.

Can one credibly hope to negate the whole tide of the past allowing for the restrictions of his much less than insignificant strength, brain wave or will?

Ashok Kumar Gupta is an trick by profession, a programmer by hobby and a sage by nature. He is the webmaster of http://www. akgupta. com


Department of Philosophy | UW College of Arts & Sciences  College of Arts and Sciences - University of Washington |

Philosophy Major  Ohio Wesleyan University

It's Not Just a Game: Advancing the Philosophy of Sport  College of Social & Behavioral Sciences

Developed by:
home | site map © 2021