Tweet
so, what is it that makes the world go around, anyway?
-
31Fate9.68%3Chance32.26%10Synchronicity12.90%4Banana45.16%14I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.
[Brandon Roderick? You mean Brock's Toadie?][Hanged from Yggdrasil] -
The sun..www.my-piano.blogspot -
i'm talking in a metaphysical sense, stu.I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.
[Brandon Roderick? You mean Brock's Toadie?][Hanged from Yggdrasil]Comment
-
A mixture.
A lot of the time the outcome is determined while the path is left to chance. Sometimes it just seems that way.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
If the outcome is determined, who determines it?www.my-piano.blogspotComment
-
-
'Laws of nature'.Originally posted by Boddington's
If the outcome is determined, who determines it?One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
Are you a determinist then?www.my-piano.blogspotComment
-
Kinetic energy?
Does it matter?
Why does it only have to be 1 of the 3? Maybe they take it in turns.Some cry `Allah O Akbar` in the street. And some carry Allah in their heart.
"The CIA does nothing, says nothing, allows nothing, unless its own interests are served. They are the biggest assembly of liars and theives this country ever put under one roof and they are an abomination" Deputy COS (Intel) US Army 1981-84Comment
-
No, because the Laws of Nature are not necessarily deterministic.Originally posted by Boddington's
Are you a determinist then?One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
No, but I don't believe we have free will.
Free will is a bull**** expression anyway. WTF is free will?Comment
-
So if there is an element of chance at the micro level, there is no way that there can be the same outcome at macro regardless of the micro, which is what all of you in this thread are implying.www.my-piano.blogspotComment
-
Originally posted by Boddington's
So if there is an element of chance at the micro level, there is no way that there can be the same outcome at macro regardless of the micro, which is what all of you in this thread are implying.
You've obviously never heard of convergence.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
Convergence is pretty much irrelevant here.
OK, let's say with relation to the initial question. Imagine a 5x5 grid where you start in the centre. A number lies on the outside of all 20 boxes on the perimeter. You move about the grid by a 1 in 4 chance of moving up, down, left or right.
By saying that "fate" exists, you are implying that the number you land at would have been landed at no matter which path you took.
The small steps you take obviously affect the bigger picture. If you want, make a larger grid, and a larger grid and so on.
Only when decisions (small steps) are infinitely small, and the outcome reached is infinitely huge is convergence a theoretical issue. This isn't the case in practice.
The small steps you take therefore affect the end-game result. It is illogical to claim you will land at one box regardless of the path taken.
To apply the analogy, imagine for example each move around the grid is a choice to go to the pub, cinema, beach or nothing on a particular day. Each 20 boxes on the perimeter, once reached, will let you meet a particular girl. You are not led fatefully to one particular box.
By this example I have shown fate does not exist, in relationships or any other life challenge...assuming free will.
if you don't assume free will, all outcomes are completely deterministic and actual (not perceived) probabilities are 0 and 1, rather than being 0.25www.my-piano.blogspotComment
-
There is no free will.Comment
Comment