Fate/Destiny

[Big C]

There are so many examples of peoples lives changing through coincidence it got me wondering if we are actually living a predetermined life. Brief examples being of people that for reasons unknown to them actually deviate from their regular routines, like flight assistants that have been due to work a certain flight and something crops up and they have to cancel thus avoiding an accident. People who have a certain route from work that they always stick to but for some reason decide to change only to meet their future husband/wife. Does the saying what will be will be actually have some validity? Along our life path are there people we have to meet and things that we have to do and coincidence is a tool that ensures we meet these aims? When we hear people say they were destined to be together is it possible these relationships have been mapped out and it is inevitable they had to get together? When something unforseen happens that makes us deviate from our original plan for example forgetting something so we have to return home thus having to catch the later train is is possible this could be part of a predetermined life plan that is steering us on our own individual pathway?
Best Wishes
Big C.

[Judge]

It's an interesting idea.

Basically there is no way you can make a choice, the choice has already been made and even if you think you make a differernt choice, that too is part of the preprogrammed reality.

This (IMO) explains dejavu where you get a small window into the future as if you've been there before, only it's not the future, it's you remembering how the program turns out breifly and then you forget that is preprogammed again.

Some interesting points about preprogrammed reality are........

You're the programmer
You wouldn't program something that would truly hurt you
There's nothing to fear.

This is inline with mostly what Iindian gurus propose.

There is no need to be conscerned with past or future, the now is the container of life and as it's all preprogrammed and it will work out as it should. Even your death is acceptable.

The problems arise when we don't accept this is how it works and resist this idea. So we end up fighting something that can never be changed.

As you can't truly make any real changes that aren't already programmed in, then it's best to relax and let it unfold and even enjoy what happens as you know you have pre-created it.

Judge

[RubberDuck]

One very interesting aspect of this, has been to see the life path of identical twins which were separated from birth. Although many of these grew up under very different circumstances, their lives and careers were often remarkably identical.

RD

[Big C]

Thats an interesting theory about deja vu. If we do actually have a predetermined programme and for a brief second we can recall it hence deja vu imagine if you could tap into this programme. I was thinking something like this for an explanation regarding precognitive dreams but in a lot of these cases people have premonitions of the future regarding events they are not themselves involved in, for example the tsunami, the theory falls down here as these premonitions involve other people, it would mean tapping into other peoples predestined life journey. Then the question is raised by whom are we predestined and for what purpose?

Best Wishes
Big C.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Big C

Then the question is raised by whom are we predestined and for what purpose?

This is where it gets tricky.....

6 billion predetermined simulations running constantly or just one?

The 6 billion model has a lot of issues within it that are very challenging to explain, but the single simulation theory makes it much easier.

There is only one consciousness and everything is contained inside that consciousness. Time, delay, physical reality, people, their intentions, the planet etc. This is the Subjective reality model Steve talks about and (IMO) it makes a lot of sense.

But if we've already made this choice, that includes all known things, then why? I find a couple of movie lines handy to consider........

You're not here to make a choice, you've already made the choice, you're here to understand why you made the choice.

No one can see past a choice they don't understand.

While from The Matrix, is not unlike the ancient stuff like Buddism. There is no point resisting anything that happens regardless of content and form, it's all playing out perfectly as it was supposed to.

I suppose the most important question is.........

Who is the programmer

Judge

[drama07]

Originally Posted by Judge

As you can't truly make any real changes that aren't already programmed in, then it's best to relax and let it unfold and even enjoy what happens as you know you have pre-created it.

Judge

How do we enjoy everything that unfolds? Isn't trying to enjoy attaching to the ego?

[Judge]

Originally Posted by drama07

How do we enjoy everything that unfolds? Isn't trying to enjoy attaching to the ego?

Yes, the words don't really do it justice.

Gurus speak of the watcher, the 'I am' being the observer of all creation including the mind watching the reality

Can you be the watcher of it all?

Means you have to stop identifying with your first person avatar/human being and step out from that identity.When you do that, there is no creation via thought, there can't be because you are watching the thoughts react to the creation.

I suspect, from this POV there is no purposeful creation. It's all precreated by you to watch unfold. You can use your ego to validate (enjoy) it as it happens, but you can't create anything new.

This has some value because there is no need to 'want' anything and there is no fear.

Judge

[joecooool]

i admit free will is possible. it is possible that our minds can spontaneously generate effects without the normally needed causes, but i don't see that as the probable option. i see determinism as more probable. meaning free will is an illusion. that choice exists within a larger deterministic framework. most ppl try and have their cake and eat it too; meaning they believe in free will for our minds yet believe the rest of reality obeys cause and effect. but aren't we part of reality? and so why do we get this magical exception known as free will?

[Judge]

Non resistance to what is, implies there is no way to change the course of the reality as it unfolds.

There is trust, but no free will.

If you trust you are the creator observing a preprogrammed reality, then there is nothing to fear ever. You can't make any choices in the reality, even when it seems you have free will, you don't. Changing your mind and making a choice are all part of that.

The trick (if you want to subscribe to this) is not to fear not having free will. Free will is denial that you are the creator. You're not here to make a choice (that's not the point) you're here to observe the choice and possibly figure out why you made the choice in the first place.

There is no free will and no choices to make.

I can see many advantages with this model.

Judge

[aphorist]

Originally Posted by joecooool

i admit free will is possible. it is possible that our minds can spontaneously generate effects without the normally needed causes, but i don't see that as the probable option. i see determinism as more probable. meaning free will is an illusion. that choice exists within a larger deterministic framework. most ppl try and have their cake and eat it too; meaning they believe in free will for our minds yet believe the rest of reality obeys cause and effect. but aren't we part of reality? and so why do we get this magical exception known as free will?

Let me take a stab at this. Determinism was the major player in scientific/philosophic ideas until the early-mid 20th century. We had Newtons laws of physics which basically said we can measure everything and therefore, if we know all the variables, predict the future. It was like this until the double slit experiment showed that by trying to observe a particle's placement, you change where it'll be.

So you have two playing field levels. One, our normal level, where things seem to react to each other in a deterministic way and two, a quantum level, where everything is in X locations at any give time.

This means on some level we can change the outcome, but on other levels we can't. Therefore I can have half my cake and eat the other half... Or something like that.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by aphorist

This means on some level we can change the outcome, but on other levels we can't.

Regardless of any model put forth, there has to be some kind of definable source.

It's the source people seek, not what is inside.

The value is in the container, not the contents.

Judge

[aphorist]

Well, If I can put my own opinion into the argument, I think it's through recognition that we change things and through non-recognition that we don't change things. If we believe that everything is predetermined, then it is. We will do what we will do and accept it. If we believe we can change things, and act upon that belief in the right ways, we will change things.

Thinking I'm making a decision doesn't mean I'm actually making one. To actually make a decision, I need to realize the variables involved, recognize what the usual input for the variables is, and take control of one or more of them. This requires a very broad view because if I change a variable without knowing the full implications, I could be creating a outcome not in line with my thought, and therefore I didn't decide the outcome.

Therefore it is sometimes very hard to decide to do something, but as long as I recognize the status quo and change a variable, I'm making a choice. If I let go of ego and all of the social conditioning along with ego, then I'm making a conscious choice.

[joecooool]

Originally Posted by aphorist

Let me take a stab at this. Determinism was the major player in scientific/philosophic ideas until the early-mid 20th century. We had Newtons laws of physics which basically said we can measure everything and therefore, if we know all the variables, predict the future. It was like this until the double slit experiment showed that by trying to observe a particle's placement, you change where it'll be.

So you have two playing field levels. One, our normal level, where things seem to react to each other in a deterministic way and two, a quantum level, where everything is in X locations at any give time.

This means on some level we can change the outcome, but on other levels we can't. Therefore I can have half my cake and eat the other half... Or something like that.

no. ive delt with this mistake before. on this forum before too. quantum mechanics does nothing to help free will at all.

free will basically means our minds can generate causes without effects. randomness would do nothing to help this. quantum probability would do nothing to help this. and the double slit experiment does nothing to help this. double slit doesnt show that we can control matter with our minds, all it shows is that there is a different effect when something is being measured/observed.

so quantum mechanics does nothing at all to help the existence of free will

although i am open to the possibility free will exists. but i cant go around beleiving in every self evident thing there is. otherwise i will believe the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth, because that is self evident. but science shows its not true.

same with free will, it seems self evident that we have it, but when we examine it scientifically it seems like just another illusion.

and remember just because we dont have free willl doesnt mean we dont have choice. we still have choices there just not ultimately free. we have no free choice, our choices are bound within a larger framework outside of our control.

[wolfgang]

I would say we have a lot of automatic responses that come from our habitual subconscious. We choose mostly out of habit. When we become conscious of a choice, that is our aware function noticing that a choice is being made - at that point we get to pretend it was something we decided to do. And maybe have thoughts about it until the action happens related to the decision. So that's one thing that isn't really a free will - it's like a behavioral response system that does it's thing for us. Our conditioning chooses for us. If we want to decide something else that isn't in our conditioning - we don't have much say. Our aware functioning is not as powerful as our subconscious habitual mind. So in this view, our little aware function would have to retrain the subconscious mind to do what we want. This implies a bit of free will in our mind that has volition. We can think what ever we want but the mass of conditioning is what really does it all.

But, then what about our little bit of aware function processing mind? It appears to have a free will to it. That we are able to direct our thoughts. To ask for change. To design our life, if we do the right programming or pursue something rewarding, we keep at it and eventually gain habits about this particular of life we are seeking. So is that no free will? The conditioning that we carry around with us - was that not done with individual volition effecting the subconscious programming?

I'm actually arguing/debating with myself. My canned response is normally we don't have free will. There's a predestined path we are living out. How else could the now be perfect as is? If I am not really having these thoughts, don't really have a say or free will to think otherwise - maybe it's not a matter of free will or fate but of having identified myself in the thoughts/decisions/actions that are there versus letting it run without seeing a "me" there. Without the "me" the free will or fate issue is moot. There is no "me" that is operating with free will nor fate, because there is no "me". Not very clear, sorry.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

If I am not really having these thoughts, don't really have a say or free will to think otherwise - maybe it's not a matter of free will or fate but of having identified myself in the thoughts/decisions/actions that are there versus letting it run without seeing a "me" there.

The Indian Gurus support this idea. No need to consider past or future, they exist in the realm of acceptance and allowance, trusting that which they are, knows what it's doing.

It's an interesting concept. Not much ego, trusting it will play out accordingly. The concept of resistance blocks acceptance and creates suffering. To exist is to stand out, to be seperate, there is the suffering.

Judge

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Judge

The Indian Gurus support this idea. No need to consider past or future, they exist in the realm of acceptance and allowance, trusting that which they are, knows what it's doing.

It's an interesting concept. Not much ego, trusting it will play out accordingly. The concept of resistance blocks acceptance and creates suffering. To exist is to stand out, to be seperate, there is the suffering.

Judge

Glad it made some sense. I was having some detached feeling going on about these ideas, that they aren't "my" ideas at all. or like my thoughts themselves are not "mine". I can sense not being these thoughts - yet I seem to be able to direct them. Or maybe not. How do I know these thoughts are directed by me, by volition? I don't. And to have a sense of self seems to be related to "having" thoughts. I which I could state what I'm after here.

Even it your life is all fated, doesn't mean we should live as if we don't have choices. The volition we feel, the thinking around deciding something, may be partly subconscious patterns influencing your persona - and partly just having made a self to attach these thoughts to. do you think?

I sometimes feel that our beings are running around in some sort of field and our persona is getting information from this field like antennas tuned into some sort of flow. And that field is the instigator of experience.

[joecooool]

everyone believes in cause and effect. and most believe in free will. despite the fact that they are mutually exclusive. unless you say the mind is separate from the reality which contains cause and effect.

so either you ditch cause and effect or you ditch free will, or you ditch our mind being part of the cause and effect. or you have a fourth option?

personally i keep cause and effect, and i keep the mind being part of cause and effect, and so i have to ditch free will.

i think science is already proving that an idea arises in the subconscious a second before we choose it. choice seems to be this illusion that is strung on afterward for i dont know what reason.

[aphorist]

Originally Posted by joecooool

everyone believes in cause and effect. and most believe in free will. despite the fact that they are mutually exclusive. unless you say the mind is separate from the reality which contains cause and effect.

so either you ditch cause and effect or you ditch free will, or you ditch our mind being part of the cause and effect. or you have a fourth option?

personally i keep cause and effect, and i keep the mind being part of cause and effect, and so i have to ditch free will.

i think science is already proving that an idea arises in the subconscious a second before we choose it. choice seems to be this illusion that is strung on afterward for i dont know what reason.

Here's what I say. There is earthly cause and effect. And then there is universal cause and effect. The inner-mind is controlled by the universal, the ego is controlled by the earthly. The choice lies in if I let myself be affected by universal law or earthly law.

I am bound, but I still have choice, a will, if you will.

[JoeGoldfarb]

we live in a reality of causality. our free will exists only as the ability to say "no" to break causality chains.

[Craftwarft]

I personally believe in Fate/Destiny and that Things do happen for a reason. But i also believe in free will. There are to many coincidences in this world as well as miracles so to say, to dismiss the fact that Fate/destiny do exist. We cannot blame everything on random events of cause and effect. We all have the freedom of choice and will to do as we like, and there are outside forces to help us get to where we are suppose to get to. The future isn't written, but there are events in life that are suppose to happen for the better, wheter we see it or not. If free will and choice were non-existent, then would murderers have a choice to kill? or were they born to kill and it was written since the day he was born. Are we responsible for our actions? or can we blame it on being "programmed into us". I don't see how we can be judge by god if everything is predestined to happen, our thoughts and actions. Some people were destined to go to hell? it just doesn't make sense. Please make sense of this confusion i have.....

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Craftwarft

We all have the freedom of choice and will to do as we like, and there are outside forces to help us get to where we are suppose to get to.

You can choose to believe that and in doing so, you answer you own question.

I don't believe we have much choice if any at all, but of course that is from the egoic POV.

The LoA shows this flaw. Simple thoughts without emotion may manifest and lots of thought and emotion may manifest or neither may manifest.

It's too much of a flawed system to be of value, because it's based on ego and even surrendering. While surrendering has some value compared to egoic self concern, it still implies being aligned with ego. So in affect you are still ego, but just allowing.

The center of creation still is dependant on an egoic POV.

An ego even allowing, can't accept that it creates the universe. The only way out of this, is to realise you are god and is not about choice at all.

It's about why.

If you were god, I'd imagine you wouldn't be thinking and choosing what to do and create next, that is way too much like egoic self concern. You would be creating only in the now, so there is really no choice. At best you have either preprogrammed it all, or you create instantly almost randomly and the only question is why.

Judge

[RubberDuck]

Originally Posted by Judge

An ego even allowing, can't accept that it creates the universe. The only way out of this, is to realise you are god and is not about choice at all.

So by assuming god powers, you leave no space for any resistance, because there is nobody and nothing to blame for anything, and you yourself has absolute responsibility for all that happens?

This can be a very helpful attitude to have towards life, and it does work. But who created the creator (Which I guess is a typical question from the mind at work)

Then again, I can't help to feel that somebody is watching over me, is gratitude towards an assumed higher force, the same as passing on responsibility? I would think it okay, as long as there is no resistance towards what is, without labeling it good or bad?


RD

[Judge]

Originally Posted by RubberDuck

So by assuming god powers, you leave no space for any resistance, because there is nobody and nothing to blame for anything, and you yourself has absolute responsibility for all that happens?

This can be a very helpful attitude to have towards life, and it does work. But who created the creator (Which I guess is a typical question from the mind at work)

Then again, I can't help to feel that somebody is watching over me, is gratitude towards an assumed higher force, the same as passing on responsibility? I would think it okay, as long as there is no resistance towards what is, without labeling it good or bad?

Read what you have posted.

It has no meaning, other than to keep your ego busy.

You are stating facts you believe, premise you allude to and questions only you can answer.

You ask questions, answer them and then ask others to help your answer the questions you present.

No wonder you have questions.

Stop asking.

Wake up

Judge