Fate v 4.1

[DoomYoshi]

I can't remember what version of the thread we left off at, but this is another chapter in the Free Will vs Determinism debate series. Forgive me if the numbering is wrong but now we can debate whether or not I had any control over the thread.

So many years ago, determinism was generally viewed in terms of a Divine Presence which was both omniscient and omnipotent. The omniscience of future events led to determinism, with the omnipotence being used to corral the straggling wills. A more modern view (except obviously also held by the ancient Stoics) is that the world is mechanically determined, that everything is physical and nothing is left to chance. The problem with both deterministic viewpoints is that nobody actually lives like that. If everything was due to happen anyway, why not randomize everything you do or even better do nothing at all? What evidence is there for free will or for chance events?

The idea of free will seems like the harder of these two to accept. First, one must prove that there is such a thing as a will at all, or a mind that is capable of thought. In several years of probing my own "mind", I have found no evidence that it actually exists.

The randomness argument can't be taken to explain the real world because all mathematical assumptions around randomness happen only in mathematical reality, not in any form of reality we can experience as of yet.

In short, it seems determinism is the only way, but I yearn for a proof against it. That yearning is possibly the human condition. The human condition can be defined as follows:
1) there being no proof or reasoning that our own lives should be extended other than our own opinion on the matter;
2) our own opinion on the matter generally being in favor of extending our life;
3) therefore using false rationality to provide evidences in favor of extending our lives when none can be furnished

The fear of death would therefore be the fear of being proven wrong.

[DoomYoshi]

Great discussion guys.

Here's some definitions we can use in this thread:

Fate: anything that happens in a deterministic manner happens due to fate (more strictly, probability = 1 for this event at any point in the timeline)
Fortune: anything that happens in a random or chance-influenced manner happens due to fortune (probability is less than 1 before the event occurs and can only be 1 or 0 after the event has occurred or hasn't)
Freedom: anything that happens due to a person's own free will happens due to freedom (some interplay of rational thought with irrational thought combine into actions which then cause events)

So the question is where in this three-way axis does reality lie? Note that I have specifically broadened the usual 2-way axis to 3-ways. In many ways fate and fortune would seem to similar. The basic thought might be that both fate and fortune happen outside of the control of the will of man and even if they were different, we wouldn't necessarily be able to tell them apart. However, as I mentioned in my previous post, fortune is one way in which the shackles of fate may be broken. If fortune can be proved it necessarily follows that fate isn't all-encompassing.

So it seems really basic with these three definitions. However, there are dozens of ways these three factors can be thought of or combined. Gradually, I want to study explicit philosophical statements on these three factors and follow the implicit results of these thoughts. For now, here are some more generic concepts. I won't go into the details of intrinsic/extrinsic varieties quite yet, as I'm still mulling it over in my mind. Consider this for now: a coal is in a box and the box is hermetically sealed. In 90 minutes a timer will go off and everything in the box will be incinerated in an act of fate. This timer can be a feature of the box itself (within the system) or outside the box (outside the system). Either way something outside the box can intervene (a chance element or a different fate). If something inside the box could intervene it could also potentially be a fortune element. Now, if instead of coal it was a rational being inside the box who was fated to die (as all men are fated to do), can fortune or freedom assay that fate? The systems of reference are going to be absolutely necessary to determine anything, but for now we can leave them loosely defined.

Types of Fate:
Fate by Definition A mortal is anything fated to die, an immortal anything fated to live, by definition. It might seem that immortals have already fulfilled their destiny while extant mortals are merely waiting to fulfill to. However, based on our mathematical foundation from earlier we will realize that unless time doesn't follow a general fate framework, we already might as well have died since it is our p = 1 event.
Fate by Foreknowledge/Prophecy If something about the future is known with 100% certainty, then the knowing becomes the fulfilling in that once the p=1 it might as well have already happened.
Fate by Foreordination/Divine Will These are the events that are directly caused by a divine being. For the Greeks, Zeus could do whatever he wanted, but he often chose to feast on Olympus and let the mortals tend their own affairs. For Christians, God ordained the world but not the Fall. A great question is whether this is influenced by humans or not.
Fate by Mechanics These are the physical properties of the universe. This is the only of the 4 definitions of fate that is never denied, although there is disagreement about how much is fortune vs. fate.

Types of Fortune:
Illusory Fortune Pure fatalists will claim that all fortune is in this category. It only seems random, it was actually fate all along.
Pure Fortune Basically there is a certain amount of randomness inherent in the macro-system of the world.
Quantum Fortune At the quantum level, chance effects are able to add chance to the macro-world.
Divine Fortune Some divine being is acting against the fate system.

Types of Freedom:
Self-Freedom This is where you are able to make up your own mind about things.
Societal Freedom A society is able to decide how to operate. This seems like a trivial case, but I'm hoping to build some great examples with this.
Other Freedom It's important to consider that another rational actor's freedom may seem like fate or fortune to your perspective.
Divine Freedom The freedom or will of divine beings.

That's all for today. Don't be afraid to post, I will keep going either way.

[DoomYoshi]

In place of today's regularly scheduled programming, here's a musical interlude:


So this song makes the case that Fate and Fortune are one and the same since the "Fortuna" seems to share the characteristics of fate.

The song O Fortuna is actually a musical setting to a 11th-13th century poem that was rediscovered in the 1800s as part of the Carmina Burana collection of poems. That collection was written by the Goliards, who are the medieval equivalent to this forum.

Here's a description of them:

Priests and clerks.. dance in the choir dressed as women... they sing wanton songs. They eat black pudding at the altar itself, while the celebrant is saying Mass. They play dice on the altar. They cense with stinking smoke from the soles of old shoes. They run and leap throughout the church, without a blush of their own shame. Finally they drive about the town and its theatres in shabby carriages and carts, and rouse the laughter of their fellows and the bystanders in infamous performances, with indecent gestures and with scurrilous and unchaste words.

You may wonder how they got that way. Here's the answer:

The goliardic class is believed to have arisen from the need of younger sons to develop means of support. The medieval social convention of primogeniture meant that the eldest son inherited title and estate.[5] This practice of bestowing the rights of inheritance upon the eldest son left younger sons to seek other means by which to support themselves. Often, these younger sons went (or were sent to) the universities or monasteries of the day, where theology and preparation for clergy careers were a major focus.[5] Many felt no particular affinity for religious office,[5] and many could not secure an office even if they desired one because of an overabundant supply of those educated in theology.[6] Consequently, over-educated, under-motivated clerics often adopted not the life of an ordered monk, but one mainly intent on the pursuit of carnal pleasures.

It sounds ridiculously similar to the group of overeducated trollops that frequent this forum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliard

[Dukasaur]

In place of today's regularly scheduled programming, here's a musical interlude:


So this song makes the case that Fate and Fortune are one and the same since the "Fortuna" seems to share the characteristics of fate.

The song O Fortuna is actually a musical setting to a 11th-13th century poem that was rediscovered in the 1800s as part of the Carmina Burana collection of poems. That collection was written by the Goliards, who are the medieval equivalent to this forum.

Here's a description of them:

Priests and clerks.. dance in the choir dressed as women... they sing wanton songs. They eat black pudding at the altar itself, while the celebrant is saying Mass. They play dice on the altar. They cense with stinking smoke from the soles of old shoes. They run and leap throughout the church, without a blush of their own shame. Finally they drive about the town and its theatres in shabby carriages and carts, and rouse the laughter of their fellows and the bystanders in infamous performances, with indecent gestures and with scurrilous and unchaste words.

You may wonder how they got that way. Here's the answer:

The goliardic class is believed to have arisen from the need of younger sons to develop means of support. The medieval social convention of primogeniture meant that the eldest son inherited title and estate.[5] This practice of bestowing the rights of inheritance upon the eldest son left younger sons to seek other means by which to support themselves. Often, these younger sons went (or were sent to) the universities or monasteries of the day, where theology and preparation for clergy careers were a major focus.[5] Many felt no particular affinity for religious office,[5] and many could not secure an office even if they desired one because of an overabundant supply of those educated in theology.[6] Consequently, over-educated, under-motivated clerics often adopted not the life of an ordered monk, but one mainly intent on the pursuit of carnal pleasures.

It sounds ridiculously similar to the group of overeducated trollops that frequent this forum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliard

Verily!