Is Fatalism Incompatible With Free Will?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

manored
 
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 10:11 am
@prothero,
prothero;159381 wrote:
Well fatalism is pretty much the notion of a fixed unalterable future
and
Free will is pretty much the notion of the ability to do otherwise and affect/change/alter the future
so
I would say they are incompatible using those notions of meaning or defintions.
But cant the ability to change the future make part of a unaltered future?

That is, I may be making choices, but god, if there is one, may already know ever choice I will make. Thus, the alterations of my free will are already part of the "written', unalterable future.

kennethamy;159390 wrote:
What other definitions are there?

What is expressed as true always depends on what the expression means, although what is true never depends on what the expression means. What is true never depends on what anyone says is true.

---------- Post added 05-02-2010 at 05:42 PM ----------



To err is human. So we always might be wrong. But that, of course, does not mean that we are not right, and that we cannot know that we are right. The following argument is invalid:

1. I might be wrong about P.

Therefore, 2. I am wrong about P, and I don't know that P is true.

The following argument is valid:

1. I might be wrong about P.

Therefore, 2. It is possible that I am wrong about P, and I am not certain that P is true.

Where P is, 2+2=4, or that the Sun will rise tomorrow.

On the other hand, of course, 2+2 =4 is a necessary truth, and so, it is impossible for it to be false. But, that the Sun will rise tomorrow is a contingent truth, and it is possible for it to be false.

Since it must be true that what is fated will happen , it is logically impossible to avoid your fate, for if you avoid it, it cannot have been your fate in the first place. Therefore, either you did not avoid your fate, or it was not your fate. That is what the term "fate", means.
I agree.

HexHammer;159464 wrote:
If a poor child was born in the ghetto, the child's destiny may lie in provety, crime and misery, wouldn't one want to avoid such destiny?

Now I don't think avoiding a destiny is the only approach to the matter, it's also prosuit.

If a child is a prodegy savant, wouldn't it be prone to think it's destiny would lie in the childs gift? I saw a child being only 4 years and was educated doctor, should he suddenly avoid his destiny by giving up his path?
You are using the word destiny with a different meaning here, witch is about "apparent path one will follow in life". Indeed that can be changed, but if we use the word with that other meaning, "path one will follow in life", then destiny cannot be avoided, because whatever you do, even avoidance, is part of it.
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 10:14 am
@manored,
manored;160001 wrote:
You are using the word destiny with a different meaning here, witch is about "apparent path one will follow in life". Indeed that can be changed, but if we use the word with that other meaning, "path one will follow in life", then destiny cannot be avoided, because whatever you do, even avoidance, is part of it.
Imo that still is within the definition of destiny, just a bit more clear than what other suggest.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 10:24 am
@manored,
manored;160001 wrote:
But cant the ability to change the future make part of a unaltered future?

That is, I may be making choices, but god, if there is one, may already know ever choice I will make. Thus, the alterations of my free will are already part of the "written', unalterable future.

I agree.

You are using the word destiny with a different meaning here, witch is about "apparent path one will follow in life". Indeed that can be changed, but if we use the word with that other meaning, "path one will follow in life", then destiny cannot be avoided, because whatever you do, even avoidance, is part of it.



If you mean that what happens is partly determined by my choices, that is right. That is exactly what is meant by having free will. What happens to me depends on what I do.

There is nothing unalterable about the choices I make. I often need not have made the choices I did make. And if God knew what choices I was going to make, that was because I was going to make the choices I did make. His knowing what choices I would make did not determine what choices I made. On the contrary, what choices I made determined God's knowledge of the choices I made. Since had I made different choices, God would have know that those were the choices I made. After all, how could God (or anyone, for that matter) know what choices I will make unless those are the choices I will make?

Fatalism is incompatible with free will, of course. But since fatalism is clearly false, what does that matter?
 
JPhil
 
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 11:12 am
@kennethamy,
In any case, it does not follow from the fact that a proposition is true (or even always true) that we know it is true. Although it does follow from the fact that we know a proposition is true that it is true. Knowledge implies truth; but truth does not imply knowledge.[/QUOTE]

Knowledge implies. How is this true? Why not the other way around?
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 11:34 am
@JPhil,
JPhil;160032 wrote:
In any case, it does not follow from the fact that a proposition is true (or even always true) that we know it is true. Although it does follow from the fact that we know a proposition is true that it is true. Knowledge implies truth; but truth does not imply knowledge.

Knowledge implies. How is this true? Why not the other way around?


Fatalism is incompatible with free will. Knowledge is not sufficient. Facts & Speed is not civilization. Never been. On the bright side: there were allways surviving dots of optimism around the world.

:bigsmile: Pepijn HS Sweep
(PepI for friends)Laughing
 
manored
 
Reply Wed 5 May, 2010 09:08 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;160004 wrote:
Imo that still is within the definition of destiny, just a bit more clear than what other suggest.
But there is a big difference between the two definitions, because one allows you to change your destiny, and the other does not.

kennethamy;160012 wrote:
Fatalism is incompatible with free will, of course. But since fatalism is clearly false, what does that matter?
good point =)
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/05/2024 at 08:40:36