This is where, I think, the idea of the universe and all of existence being nothing more than God's thought process comes from.
For me since im a christian i believe that god has a fate already designed for us but he does give us a choice, yet he already knows what we will choose.
That is what fate is Fate in a sense certainly exists and while it can not be proved, it can be reasoned using obvious logic.
Everything that occurs does so because of a set of previous occurrences coming into conjunction. In the case of a person making a choice, the choice is decided upon using a large collection of categorized biases. All though biases are based upon others and so on. All of which leading back to a singular particle that developed down one path instead of only one other possible option and thus paved the way for the entire universe.
Down to a simple electron, all are choices are inevitable. The bonding of two atoms being possible and two others being impossible is all due to the biases of those atoms, which are thusly because of the biases of an electron. If you continue down the scale you would find the particle that started the entire process leading up to what you choose to eat for dinner tonight.
To say that the universe doesn't follow a set path would mean that random occurrences are possible. This is however not the case. An experiment to prove this statement and my argument as a whole, I'm using the word "prove" a bit strongly, would be to think critically about what a random occurrence is. If you can establish any sort happening or effect that is with a cause of any kind, then I am wrong.
Keep in mind that unknown causes are still causes. Fate is the only possible scenario due to mathematics. The fact that everything in the universe can be calculated lends itself to the fact that no matter what we do, the course of our life is already set as each microsecond is just the sum of the calculations made to get to this point in time.
Even the firing of synapses in your brain could be calculated and predicted along their inevitable path and hence even your dreams would be predictable. Obviously this would never be possible as the amount of processing power required to predict it would be impossible to generate as it would need to predict itself and be in an infinite loop, and trying to calculate everything is a ridiculous concept so therefore can only ever be a theory.
This is along the principles of the butterfly effect. Moreover in my personal view based on no facts what so ever I think this can explain why we will never be able to time travel. Time, as we know it, is merely our perceived view on existence. We are purely viewing time in a state where everything exists and adheres to our laws of physics based purely on the speed at which we see it happening and we only exist at that speed.
Everything in our lives has already happened, I have already died, the world has already ended, however we are viewing it at a much slower rate so have yet to catch up these events. If we managed to travel into the future we would be seeing calculations before they have taken place in the correct order in which case our laws of physics would not apply as every single calculation in the universe is dependent on those around it, water may cease to be liquid, or be water, metal may be gas etc.
If we tried to go back in time we would be seeing calculations happening at a slower rate so their state would be different, every property of every molecule would change. I think life is like an old VHS video, we can only view it properly at a certain speed if we try to view it during fast forward it makes no sense, if we try to view it during rewind it makes no sense, however the beginning middle and end are set, the fact they exist on the tape means they have already happened and we are just viewing them at a set speed?
A child was born in because I had attempted a letter to his mother on New Year's Eve His mother was born in August His father in Guess what? No one can fake the births of three people. Maybe there are certain milestones you have to complete in your lifetime but you get to decide how you achieve those goals. The word Fate is derived from the latin word Fata with its neutral plural form as Fatum.
It can also mean death hence the current use of words like fatal. I know it doesn't sound romantic, but we are machines made up of organic matter.
That is the purpose of our biology and genes; to continue to function until it can no longer can. You can expand this further to explain other organisms and even the universe. My point. Your title of debate and statement whether we have free will or if we are pre-programmed, along with your argument sides yes fate does exist vs no fate does not is confusing and doesn't make sense. On one hand you ask about the existence of fate.
Fate is not being, it does not have life or animation nor does it come forth, appear or emerge. You then give fate the authority to control. Since when did fate have control? Can you prove of this control? On the other you speak to the existence of free will or being pre-programmed as a means of fate and destiny.
What does fate or destiny have to do with human biology? How can one decide ones future if one does not know the future? Destiny, "the predetermined, usually inevitable or irresistible, course of events" how can free will have anything to this. How can one control a destiny?
Do you see what i'm getting at? I've said this in another post here before, but it's the only response I have for this question. If you believe in fate, go driving, let go of the wheel, and slam on the gas for a few minutes. Don't worry, if your not supposed to die, you won't, but if you are, we'll that's one less irrational person on our hands. So since there is no evidence to say that fate does exist, the proposal passes and fate does not exist.
So since there is no evidence to say that fate does not exist, the proposal passes and fate does exist.
Intelligent design at least works mathematically and explains paradoxes. I will prove that the toothfairy doesn't exist. I will have kids one day, I will wait for their first tooth to fall out and I will make sure that niether my wife nor I take the tooth and put money there and the tooth will still be there. If we simply assume that nothing exists unless otherwise proven wrong, then aren't we such hipocrites?! That's like saying that women don't deserve as many rights as men or better yet that men are better than women or vice-versa.
So what you are saying makes me feel like you are implying that fate became derrived from the Church's total belief of the end of the world. That we are all heading towards something-the apocalypse-and it is a predetermined thing that we can neither choose nor alter. So like I said, it is the Church's fault that fate exists. But seeing as how I am Jewish I do not believe in most of the practices and beliefs of the Church so therefore I must say that fate, at least on a religious level, doesn't exist.
But then again I have always been told that G-d had a plan for everyone, that our fate was predetermined before we were born. I'm not saying fate or destiny has to be a religious belief.
But, like I said, fate is destiny and vice-versa. The fact that it doesn't have to be a religious belief does not mean that it did not spawn from a belief first introduced by the Church. Clearly it can imply exactly that, however Christianity, however like Judaism it says it is, is, in fact, nothing like Judaism at all! Just because something spawns from something else does not mean it is the same thing. On the Planck scale the bottom layer of existence , the universe movements are binary, where one frame only interacts with the adjoining frame.
What appears random or chaotic may be encoded into the most fundamental level of existence. This leaves little room for chance and choice. All events, even quantum events, have a definite starting and ending point. But there is uncertainty as to what happens in between. One can say quantum physics creates flexibility in the middle, where we might have a chance to control some aspects of our lives—but not on a significant level.
It appears that we have little control over our lives. The most wonderful and dreadful thing about destiny is that we will never know, until the future arrives as the present. The quality of our life depends on how we deal with this uncertainty. Here are a few thoughts. We do make choices every single moment.
From the mundane to what appears to be the most life changing decisions, and we feel we have some control. But there are events that we cannot change, or even understand—no matter how hard we try. We can try and minimize some of the risks, but there are eventualities that will take place. Accept the things to which fate binds you and love the people with whom fate brings you together, and do so with all your heart. We, like other aspects of life, are destined to experience some of these contrasts and a shade or more of the in-between.
A deterministic fate might feel depressing or exciting … limiting or liberating—depending on how you look at it. There is no point in resisting, arguing with, or trying to change the unchangeable and uncontrollable tune of this life. The unknown future may as well determine significant portions of our life, even in this moment.
Fate may have the final say. But whatever those two sides are, they will have a consistent relationship to each other: They could be identical, for example, or always differ by one. If you ever saw this happen, you might assume the dice were loaded or fixed before they were rolled.
But no crooked dice could behave this way. After all, the Atlantic City die changes its behavior depending on what is going on with the Las Vegas die and vice versa, even if you roll them at the same moment. The standard interpretation of entanglement is that there is some kind of instant communication happening between the two particles.
Any communication between them would have to travel the intervening distance instantaneously—that is, infinitely fast. That is plainly faster than light, a speed of communication prohibited by the theory of relativity. According to Einstein, nothing at all should be able to do that, leading him to think that some new physics must be operating, beyond the scope of quantum mechanics itself.
The word resonated throughout the large lecture hall. I had just finished describing a revolutionary concept for a new type of matter that my graduate student, Dov Levine, and I had invented. The Caltech lecture room was packed with Suppose it is not the case that the particles or dice communicate instantaneously with each other, and it is also not the case that their values were fixed in advance.
There seem to be no options remaining. But here Price asks us to consider the impossible: that doing something to either of the entangled particles causes effects which travel backward in time to the point in the past when the two particles were close together and interacting strongly. At that point, information from the future is exchanged, each particle alters the behavior of its partner, and these effects then carry forward into the future again.
There is no need for instantaneous communication, and no violation of relativity. At first glance, this interpretation of entanglement replaces one troublesome behavior—instantaneous communication across arbitrary distances—with another—information traveling backward in time. But should we actually be troubled by the idea of information from the future traveling into the past? After all, mathematically, entanglement in time is identical to entanglement in space, and we have no qualms with information traveling in all directions across space.
To think about this problem, consider the most prosaic of objects: a popsicle stick. The stick will bend or buckle, depending on the pressure you apply to both ends. Now imagine a popsicle stick whose ends are separated in time, rather than in space.
The same logic should apply: What happens to the middle of the stick will depend on the situation at each end.
0コメント