We do not have total control but surely have some control.  We have control over unimportant aspects of our life that it is not necessary to enumerate because they are so many but the more important aspects of our life do not in general only involve ourself but also involve other persons and there it is not possible to have full control but for that we have to convince other peoples to participate into certain paths of changes. We are thrown in the world by our parents and are inculturated into a society and gradually discover the whole world from this perspective trying our best to open it. Although it is true that we do not have all the choices but are constrainted by our circumstances, we are also the artisan of our life by the choices we made in in the kind of social participations we are involved.  The more we are conscious of what we really are and what we are really doing and the more fruitfull will become our choices.

Dear Suresh,

You know, many great philosophers have gone bonkers trying to answer your question.

Instead of trying to answer your question directly, I would first like to ask a question of my own!

I want to try to pin down exactly what is required of a situation such that we may claim that 'free will' is happening!

Let us suppose that we take a personality - a consciousness - from somewhere - perhaps even from a different universe! We remove from him/her/it all causal influences and stimuli. We effectively remove whatever universe there was and leave a disembodied consciousness in limbo.

The only causal events are the causal events associated with consciousness - in the way that thought gives rise to further thought.

Suresh, the question is - If an observer was not given any information about how this consciousness came to be, then, given that he/she could 'observe' each thought as it unfolded could he/she determine if the consciousness was exhibiting 'free will'?

Our focus is already preoccupied by a thought, so it can't know what's the next thought Or it can't switch between thoughts. So freewill is illusion. Decision is experienced in our consciousness as any other thought. We are all part of the singular expression of universe.

Dear Mr. Vatsyayann, I don´t know what makes us human beings. Many people think that only just our will, our decisions are the driving force of destiny and future.

But if we can predict natural processes, factors of human behavior, mathematical patterns, and can see them over and over again in a repetitive pattern, can be this pattern applied to human life? Than it could be a part of "destiny", which is the code with a certain predestination, dependence prior experience, which is coordinated by the possible human will.

Suresh,

You ask "Is what I do now the result of what happened before, or my pure will?" Why must these two things be set in opposition to one another? Can't they actually coalesce and overlap? Obviously the forces which brought us into existence were beyond our control. Obviously we have no control over the particular 46 chromosomes which comprise our own genetic makeup. Yet we obviously do have a degree of control over what we do with what we have been given.

Aristotle uses the notion of an organism's entelechy to speak of it reaching its full potential. His classic illustration is that of the "corn" (the acorn) which potentially can become a mighty oak if it reaches its full potential. If you are to become your "best self", if you are to reach the apex of your own potential and achieve your entelechy, surely you have a part to play in that happening.

Abraham Lincoln stated that "Success is measured by the ratio between what a man might be and what he is." Unless I assume a volitional stance of apathy and indolence, I have a part to play in my own development.

That being said, my study of the human organism leads me to believe that in the nature/nurture debate, nature is the biggest part of the equation. Nurture can either thwart or assist nature in attaining its full potential, but if there is no potential within the developing human for a particular skill then all the nurture in the world cannot put it there.

I believe it is Charles here on RG who makes much of the notion of stewardship. I believe my life and my own genetic makeup is a stewardship entrusted to me. I can develop it or let it stagnate. So, will combines with potential and we help create our own destiny.

The question is actually about existence of a free will. Modern science does not have an answer to the question. Philosophy is only for asking questions, not for answering them. So, it’s up to you to decide. Many people (me included) believe in a free will. However, “free” will is greatly restricted by upbringing and circumstances. Actually so much restricted that quite a lot of people behave like thoroughly programmed automations.

You last sentence including "thoroughly programmed automation" is scientifically philosophical. Love this use of scientific words ...and it seems right too ...everything we do today has been influenced to the extent of being programmed that leads 'a' action on our part rather than free will ....thanx Vladimir

Dear Bill

Thanx for your beautiful explanation.

If I understand, we are a part of this environment, however we also are born full of our individual tendencies (genes) derived from all the past environmental influences. Now with these tendencies we struggle to further our present life, living and experiencing the present environment.

There are tendencies and there are 'wills' that are tendencies too.' We may like to stay one up on the environment through our 'will.' Nature forces us to stay closer to a symbiotic relationship between the environment and our tendencies, or 'will.' In the mean time our 'will' is struggling in the universal 'will' (the will of all the constituents of that 'universal will', and we either win or lose (if there is something like winning or losing).

The environment is our savior, and destroyer as well. I tend to believe that whatever happens today with me is the result of my tendencies and its interaction with the present environment. I was born a puppet in the hands of my genetic makeup collected over the millions years. However, what I do/we do today under whatever influences of the past through this 'will,' will likewise start a chain reaction, that will change the whole world tomorrow. If we do not count the other living beings, its is such a mess, a turbulent mess where everyone is an individual trying to have an influential hand over the total of others (environment for that individual). It is the nature that is supreme and we are a tiny fraction of the same nature, we make that Nature complete ...here we are like a drop in ocean where the ocean is formed from the very same drops. 'Will', or no'will' we still remain puppets in the hands of total nature. Something, someone triggers our living and acting, and that is not in our control. Would I have written what I am writing now if Bill had not written what he has above?

Can we conclude that we are a machine that follows certain action depending upon our inborn and then under their influence, the acquired tendencies. We are forced by these tendencies and the environmental influences (others' similar tendencies) each trying to explain, influence, and, or be a contributor to the other/s ...the result then is in court of the environment, and we think I caused the result.

Thank you all the contributors so far to this question. I hope to get more discussion on this question, as it might make our differently cultured minds and resultant views.

Destiny and will … each human is singular by the genes, the education and the personality; our destiny is closely connected to our personality interrelated to the environment where we live. Education plays a big role in our vocation. Education is part of our parent’s orientation, hopeful or their inner ambition as well as a part of some of our professors’ hope. So a fraction of our destiny is made by the parents’ aspiration or fantasy. Our temperament, natural dispositions and our moral fiber are connected with the milieu where we evolve. If it is clean and suitable to success, we could succeed or not with conjunction to our natural dispositions and vice versa. The milieu could be also a brake to talent achievement. Our destiny is also connected to our daily probabilistic meeting with positive or negative people and events. I think that our will is closer to our destiny on which we have very few control, we could have much will that we couldn’t reach cause to many hidden factors.

Fairouz Bettayeb

Everything is a singular expression of Cosmos, your parents will, your circumstance everything is part of singular expression of Universe, you are not acting separately from others and you can't do so. Because your consciousness is already occupied by a thought, so next thought can't be known to you unless it arrives in your consciousness. So there is no will to the individual to act in a particular way and there is no individual either. Even before you born , your movements were determined and your purpose is already in operation.

Hi Azlan

Its okay to tell the patient what you will. However if I were you, I would think, "what a poor lady genetically and environmentally being forced to have 'will' that she has been destined to possess!!" Thanx for the question and your precious view.

@Raja,

May be our destiny is a singular expression of the cosmos as you said. Any way I don’t believe in astrology and I think that one’s actions could bring some change into one’s lives. But how change could arise and at what time is it more suitable, this issue is closely related to others awareness, because of various human sociology patterns and power-ship interests. May be our birth, parents, city, education …do not derive from our conscious will but our lives’ style is (at some scale) consciously chosen: each of us decide if he/she wants to be good or not, to be human or not, to be polite or not, to be a thief or not etc… each could change his/her environment or move to another one ‘if feasible’, each could believe or not to positive way of life and to the sense of the life. And each could have a reason or causes of life paths. May be some of our will couldn’t be achieved cause to economic issue, or to some negative people or events meeting, or to general political behavior of the city, but may be some of the will could be achieved later. Destiny is more closed to life’s moments were the person do not have any choice and must take consciously the path which is face of her example in some nature catastrophes, family’s death, accidents, bad health, wars…etc. In other issues were the person could act, she must act even if her action is inefficient at the moment, may be the result is projected latter. May be our purpose (related to future profession and time of death) is in operation before we born, but not our actions consciousness choice.

hi Fairouz Bettayeb

>> each of us decide if he/she wants to be good or not, to be human or not, to be polite or not, to be a thief or not etc… each could change his/her environment our move to another one

Dear Raja,

I think that our thoughts emerge from our consciousness, and our actions emanating from our decisions are well assumed. Unless each could kill, steal, be a bad person, and could say that it is from the unconsciousness, because consciously he/she is a good person!!!

We may see it any which way, 'will' is nothing but destiny that is an integral part of the Totality. It is some total effect of the time space changing continuum. Nothing is there that could disturb the infinite magnitude of the cycle the universe/s is/are. We are too tiny in this colossal system of things. We do get to feel that it is the 'will' that brought this result, however the result is dependent upon other people's will if you may say so.

An example for us who are lay men/women while thinking we are the doers, change agents and the people with strong 'will', is as follows:

A patient X saw me 5 days ago. Problem: moderate obesity and all the symptoms and signs of Vitamin D Deficiency (so prevalent in Indians). Took an hour of counseling on the basis of my 'Health for All through Wisdom' seminar. He was determined to follow the suggestions, seemed 100% 'will'ful to adopt the lifestyle. He was supposed to see me yesterday, but did not.

Worried, I called him on his mobile today to see how he was coping. He answered the phone and told me, "Doc thanks for calling, I am admitted in another hospital now. I can't do anything. I met with an accident 5 days ago while going back home after seeing you. Both my legs have been amputated," and he cried on the phone.

His destiny brought him to me in my hospital, and took him to the accident site. His 'will' to come to me, and take a new route to travel, was it not destiny after all that prompted him to land in to the place of accident?

'Will' is there, but looks logically to be a subset of 'destiny.' A decision made through 'will' is true but is always a subset of 'destiny', I believe and propose.

Thank you very much all for sharing your understanding, and there is nothing right or wrong, or there is nothing like gain or loss ...it is how we are all programmed to respond at a particular space time and context.

hi Fairouz Bettayeb

"I think that our thoughts emerge from our consciousness" you can't separate this, what's consciousness without thought? Then it's not consciousness. Consciousness is not the thing from which thought originates, Instead consciousness is the one which is looking into the thought. Isn't it? Perceiver and percepted can't be separated. Look at your mind, aren't you focusing on a present thought? Or have you ever left with no thought? My conclusion is, your consciousness is already occupied by a thought, It makes you a mere perceiver not the one who alternate the thoughts. Isn't it?

Bill thanx for your answer, however I would have worded last of your sentences something like this;

" I can develop it or let it stagnate, but I don't even know who actually I am. So, 'will' combines with potential (I don't know who's) and we help create our own destiny to live in a fool's paradise."

I am not forgetting my patient X whom I mentioned a few hours ago, who lost his legs.

Love this discussion!!!

Destiny and Will are two different terms according to me which denote two events but connected to eachother. One event is with respect to the physical happening (Destiny) while the other is with respect to the mental happening (Will). Usually will is associated with Ego which inturn provides the necessary strength and power for Will. Will is created within the mind of an individual which is based on his past experiences. The presence of a will within the mind inturn spurts an action by the individual. Now this action inturn produces an effect which may be an advantage or a disadvantage with respect to the individual. This effect is what we call as destiny. Hence destiny is designed by the thought which is provoked by the will of the individual.

For example a small kid after a certain experience will know that on crying he can achieve what is possible to be obtained. Hence when a desire arise to obtain a thing (eatable), he starts giving a cry. The will of the child will lead to a thought which has spurted in action of crying. Later the effect of the action is that he may get a scolding from the parent or may obtain the material that was asked for which is considered as destiny as it depends on the environment around the individual.

Yes Mahesh, thank you

Do you think one may not get results without having a will for it? Is will and wish the same thing you believe. Does it have to be your will that creates destiny, or it is a combined will (destiny) of the universe that prevails? Or, is it destiny that is the creator of any will?

Thinking of these may cause certain doubts in your mind and may clarify a few things in your mind. Then u please return your feelings and thoughts through RG, and those may throw some wisdom on all of us ...thanx

No Suresh Sir,

Wish and Will are again two different entities but still connected. A result is usually an effect of every action and the action is actually is resulted due to will only. In other words wish is the desire or material for the production of will while will is the strength for performing an action and destiny is the effect of the action.

An intention is necessary for any event. This intention is the stimulus obtained from the various sense organs. The intention is provided with the will to act or not to act to a situation. The result of action is in fact the effect of the action itself. All we wish is usually not brought out to action. An individual may wish for many things around him which may or may not be fulfilled. It is experience of the past actions that gives him an idea as what may or may not be fulfilled.

When he decides on a particular wish the ego takes the place of the wish fueling will to work out a particular task so as to get the wish fulfilled. When this wish is not fulfilled, it leads to anger, etc while when the wish is fulfilled the will and ego regarding the wish perishes giving peace of mind. But the effect which I call it as destiny will remain as an experience in the depths of the mind. If the wish is fulfilled it fuels ego while when it is not a chain of emotional reactions take place which gives rise to new set of will and ego creating more complexity in the issue.

Thus undoubtedly it is destiny that is the creator of will and will is the creator of destiny. This is the vicious circle of the creation which we call as MAYA in the religious literatures. When we surrender to the almighty (GOD) where the action propagated by the will and Effect resulted due to destiny will be nullified, there is eternal peace of mind which we call it as SELF REALISATION.

Suresh,

It would be convenient in terms of avoiding any form of responsability for our action to claim that we are puppets in a tight network of causal relations. It would also be wrong to assume that we act outside of any constraints and are endowed with a totally free will. A will that is totally constrainted is not a will at all and a totally free will would have to be outside of the universe and I cannot see how it could influence the universe through my body. Obviously these two extremes are fantasies. It is not scientifically obvious but obvious from our human experience. It is totally obvious that we are not totally constrainted in our behavior. A rock is totally contrainted but me I can decide my movement with a large degree of freedom. Those convince of the existence of a tight causality network will say that I am not controlled of my movements because such and such mechanisms inside my brain are controlling my movements. I agree that without a lot of physiological and neuronal mechanisms in my body, it would be impossible for me to move my body but it is my assumption that my will has a large degree of freedom. I cannot prove this assumption but there is no proof that this assumption is false either. All our human institutions are based on the assumption that I have a free will. Denying this assumptions is a denial of important social pillars. Assuming the non-existence of freedom without any proof is totally socially irresponsible and so it is immoral in all definition of moralityl; it intrinsically denies morallity, All sciences , quantum physics, biology, social sciences are there to testify that the world cannot be analysed as a tigh causal network. Even an electron behavior cannot be predicted. The evolution of new biological characters would not be possible if there was no random elements in nature. The more evolved are the biological organisms and the less determined their behavior are. It is a necessity given that the more evolved organisms are adapted to live in worlds that are not totally predictable and involve a large part of new creations. Economic markets are totally crazy. The Laplacian deterministic world is a fantasy that was discredited more than 100 years ago. Why is it that some scientists still beleive that we live in a totally tight network of causal relations. Even an electron does not live in such a world, why should I feel less free than an electron? These two extremes have something in common, they hide that we have to strive towards a responsable will.

Dear Dr Suresh,

Very thought provoking question. compelling one to take an 'in sight' - a look within our selves. The old Sanskrit saying 'aatmanam atmana uddareth' -only humans can elevate their own selves - perhaps provides an answer to the part when you mentioned 'will'. The simplicity yet profound meaning of the saying needs no further elaboration. So, let me look at the other word - destiny.

One of ancient India's greatest philosopher kings, Barthruhari, says in his 'Vairagya Sathakam':

"Deivena theyam iti ka purushaha vadanthi. Deivam nihatya, kuru paurusham"

Loosely translated, this would read: It is men who make destiny, God has no role in it.

By both these submission, I wish to state the obvious. Destiny is a consolation for some and a motivation for some other. As we grow in years, we need to constantly evaluate all those factors(parents, environment, education, friends, family, society, etc) that have played on us and continue to play on us so as to apply course corrections. Of course, we need to have a clear vision as to where we want to reach in order to undertake meaningful evaluations.

Having said this, my mind is still tickled on what you said as the explanation for your three word question. I would like to recommend to you to read Dr Brian Weiss. Perhaps we will have some interesting thoughts later to exchange on 'poorva karma' - the residues of our past births!

Lovely question. Have a great day, Dr Suresh!

Thanx Sri. A little more deeply; Is it not the sum total of all the 'wills' there are in this infinite universe that decisively affects our will, or an ant's will (that we cannot know). Our will is our destiny and so is every single being's. In the end however, who wins depends upon all vs me, or u vs all ...is that not logical?

Thanx for your input, sounds logical, I tend to agree on the face of it. As suggested by your good self, the topic certainly needs a fresh panel discussion face-to-face I feel positive.

Old writings need to be explained in the totality of the great books/writings. I think 'Gita' is one of the most beautiful work of 'Rishi Vyasa.' It also says, do your duty and the results are not in your control. It is here that the 'will' of the universe that includes me comes into play, and that universal sum total of the 'wills' would get us whatever results we get ...I dare call it 'destiny' when singularly applied to individuals.

I am in for deeper thoughts on this question Sri ...regards ...suresh

Dear Dr Suresh,

It is indeed a privilege that you are bestowing upon me by this opportunity to discuss a topic I am patently unqualified to do so. I am not sure about the boundaries of my ignorance, but I am very sure of the restrictive limits of my knowledge!

With Reference To (WRT) para 1 of your remarks above:

Believers amongst us attribute everything to the 'will of God'. You are right (as a believer) that there is a superior will that guides our actions. In fact, it guides even inanimate things. Otherwise how can you explain Andes in South America and Himalayas in Asia? Geological force is not a good enough explanation. What caused the geological force to begin with? There is something beyond us that our sciences have not yet found. We have just reached the 'God particle'. It will be ages before we reach God. (when we reach there we may simply find our own soul, in its purest form!). It appears that you enjoy exploring the Gita. Please read Chapter VII (full if possible), Chapter IX (poem 17) and Chapter X (poem 6).

WRT para 2:

It is, sir, it is. I mean the topic needs exploration till we find what we look for - "There is nothing else besides me, Arjuna. Like clusters of yarn-beads formed by knots on a thread, all this is threaded to me" & "Arjuna, know Me, the eternal seed of all beings. I am the intelligence of of the intelligent; the glory of the glorious am I" (Gita Chap IX, poem 7 & 10). Perhaps through our discussion we will reach where we can at least understand what He meant!!

WRT para 3:

Gita Chap II, poem 50 & 51 are the prescriptions that He makes for breaking the shackles of rebirth. I agree with you in a sense that till we are bound by our 'vasanas' it is not possible to attain the equipoise. And, till we attain that state, the universal 'will' would appear to be guiding our destinies. Catch 22!

It may be a rare case in history when the founder of the concept of Advaita (Adi Sankara) had to defeat a theist (sankhya philosopher) (mandan misra) in debate, to establish the superiority of the concept of Advaita (monism, in Hindu philosophy). While I am absolutely unqualified say anything about the school of philosophy, all I want to point out is that both these schools of thought were propounded by humans. The limits of their knowledge defined the limits of their theories. Whether God is a concept of dualism, monoism, or any other 'ism', He remains open to debate. When you win, He is praised. When I win, He is blamed. (Of course, like Krishna says, in the end, everything belongs to Him alone!)

But, yes sir, we must continue our exploration. In so far as our own destiny and will are concerned, I remain a strong believer of 'WILL'.

Have a great day.

My position is simple. I am a beleiver in : "All that exist Now". God is the creator. If one beleive in God then one beleive that God exists. It implies that all that exist is created now.

Dear Louis

I adore your 'simplicity'. Have you read Osho? You sound as though you have!!!!

The past is dead, the future unknown. What exists, is what is NOW!

Dear Srinivasan,

I do not know Osho. The structure of what exist now is what the processus of creation now preserved from the past. All we know from the past is in the structure of the now.

I belief that we can be actors of someone's dream. If your dream is strong enough you can create your own destiny and influence the future. 

It all depends if you can reach the bottom which is the quantum field where everything happens at once. You just have to live it out in the classical order. 

Thanx Rita

Should I conclude that if my parents had not met 65 years ago, you would still be giving answer to my question? Is it true that if the present is not the result of something in the past, then today's actions would not change the future as you have mentioned? 

Is WILL not part of the Destiny itself?

Kind regards

Suresh

The will follows its own destiny but not everyone can feel this.

Our linguistics are  not able to express the thoughts, they are not emancipated.

 Jazz music and poetry are better equipped, they have access to other tools to come closer to reality, they followed an other path.

A food for thought:

Everything and everyone other than me is my environment. If we dig deep, everything and every unit within me for me is also my environment. Here, me and mine would mean my total thought wave, self, the thinking me in totality, my conciousness. If my self is a separate individual/entity then everything other than this conciousness is my environment, meaning my body is also my environment. Alternatively, my body and my self both together are me and rest is all my environment.

In any case, I am being impressed, influenced, triggered, forced (knowingly or unknowingly) to behave in a certain manner. These forces outside me were the reason for my birth, growth and development and will be for my death. These environmental forces were my guide, protector, teacher as well as enemy and Destiny. These forces are certainly more powerful than me and my Will.

Now, if I could go (my Will) against these environmental forces, i will eventually have to surrender to them unless I toe myself to this environmental force, or this environmental force toes me with it.

I can become president of the US, or of the world, but I can never become the president of this total environment, the Totality, the Universe/s, the Infinite. This is because I am within this environment, and not outside it, not the creator of it and not the person keeping the Environment in my pocket.

I do, however, have a Will, a Will that is nothing but an illusion. Beyond that I have nothing. Therefore, I play with this illusion as a child plays with one's toy/s. You all who believe in Will as opposed to Destiny are right in one sense and that is that without it we would lose the Will to live and act. Action/Karma has to be there to live for a cause and happiness in life and living, motivation to do something Willfully and keep doing something we like and have tendencies for to pass the time, the time that is our Destiny.

Thanx to all contributors, but for your contributions, newer ideas and explanations would not have come to mind without your contributions, and that I think is the beauty of this Will and Destiny debate.

Of course Norah, one maybe emotionally invested in believing in something that doesn't exist like destiny to placate an inner fear of never knowing or thought avoidance of a truth that it's all just random probability and chance rather than predetermind mechanism? I suppose we are not meant to know and guess at this sort of stuff or most human thinking is a battle against an inevitable entropy of order to disorder?

If you dream very well, it leads you to the destiny. The deep of the dream is the most important; intention, attention and coherence.

 Destiny is not under our control .It is very uncertain element for our action well by we are not in position to determine the fruit of our action..In philosophical parlance ,destiny is the resulting fruits of our action of our previous lives with may be a positive line or formation of our negative action .

Will is controllable it is in our hand &we have to make our footsteps as per our determination with a far reaching decision for our progressive outlook & lifeline of our career .

As the will is within us & controlling with the energy force of our mind for which we can likely said that ''WE ARE THE ARCHITECT OF OUR OWN FORTUNE''& with this flag we can proudly said that ''SKY IS LIMIT''.

We do not have total control but surely have some control.  We have control over unimportant aspects of our life that it is not necessary to enumerate because they are so many but the more important aspects of our life do not in general only involve ourself but also involve other persons and there it is not possible to have full control but for that we have to convince other peoples to participate into certain paths of changes. We are thrown in the world by our parents and are inculturated into a society and gradually discover the whole world from this perspective trying our best to open it. Although it is true that we do not have all the choices but are constrainted by our circumstances, we are also the artisan of our life by the choices we made in in the kind of social participations we are involved.  The more we are conscious of what we really are and what we are really doing and the more fruitfull will become our choices.

It is also true that the more constrained we are the more better choices our brains must take, when freedom is immense the brains are lazy but if someone is put in front of a deadline, the brains get activated. This is why some people always need a deadline to start doing something, they need signals to react.

I am starting to believe from all the contributions so far that Destiny and Will go hand in hand. When one is there, another one (mostly) have to be there. One must have Will to do/achieve something and then Destiny comes (may come) in the way for the positive or the negative effect. In the same light, one's Will becomes someone else's Destiny and one's Destiny becomes someone's Will.

Hope I am not sounding too philosophical!!

Suresh,

Keep being philosophical. 

The word destiny is most often interpreted as meaning pre-determination.  You do not seem to use it in that way.  You seem to use it in the sense of ''what is beyond my control''.  I also think that destiny can be surprisingly friendly.

Thanx Louis

I get your point loud and clear. It however takes us back to the example in my original question. Meeting of my mother and father 65 years ago determined many things and eventually I being part of ResearchGate and this question and these answers by contributions from every ones own destiny joining this web of Destiny and Will.

And, I still remain perturbed

Interpreting the question as being essentially concerned with beginnings and endings:"will" seems to be the starting point, and destiny,its ending. I would probably go as far as to agree with Schopenhauer that our world is a representation of our will and that of others who have so willed it.

In hindsight a "will" may be abducted from destiny (interpreted as current location in our personal trajectory). If we were to start with "will" an extrapolation of our destiny seems less feasible (in the sense of mapping out our personal trajectory) and some would say this is where the illusion of free will comes into play. Because the possibilities seem endless.

So that "destiny", as current location within a trajectory, entails the existence of a will, and a degree of determinism (e.g. being compelled to ask and inquire);  a "will"on its own, may not entail a knowledge of specific endings, but is instead propelled by hope of a posible trajectory, which some would refer to as "destiny". Or a worldly representation.

Collapsing destiny into a will is much more easier than expanding a will into a destiny.

" The life of every individual, viewed as a whole and in general, and when only its most significant features are emphasized, is really a tragedy; but gone through in detail it has the character of a comedy."-Arthur Schopenhauer

Dear Shian

Thanx for your beautiful input. It gets very heartening to see how different people construct their own world, the worlds that are socially, environmentally, genetically (etc.) constructed. How would the "Will" of seven billion people act against each other without causing pure chaos, esp when almost everyone is enslaved by the money cycle.

Regards

Suresh

Dear Suresh,

Most welcome, the question is fundamental to being human.I enjoyed musing over it and the many views expressed by you and others. Definitely nothing more pertinent than being philosophical!

Cheers

"It was my 'destiny' to die when I took the decision to ('will') drink and drive and then I met with an accident and died. God said, no it was your will" and I was adamant saying, "it was my 'destiny,' and so the argument went on and on until I heard God whispering to his lieutenant, "and you still believe I made man in my image?"

Love it!!!

Thanx all 

Suresh,

Maybe it is humans who made God to their own image and if it is true then it make sense that this God make humans to his own images.  Since this is Men who made it then it is a male character while more ancient pre-historical mythologies made Goddest.  Some anthropologists defined humans as tool makers.  Humans are even more concern about making gods and goddest than making tools.  When then invented TV the start making stars , another type of gods and goddests.  

Dear Louis

Thanx

All that is known, unknown, so called real and unreal, animate and inanimate, present or not present (in human sense) right or wrong ....technically speaking is true and very much there except that different people and things "see" these differently. "See" in the last sentence means feel it, get influenced by, get transformed/reconstructed into, and/or go down the chain of evolution/mutation. It is Nature and it is not under anyone's control, nevertheless we feel and have every reason to feel that we are the "doers."  

This I believe is because western world taught us that we were individuals, forgetting that we were individuals only when being the part of the whole. Science gave us power to break down things to study so that we could know the whole. However, the future scientists forgot that we should be reconstructing the whole to understand it at each step of the scientific development vis a vis each newer understanding. We have indirectly been influenced by the slogans like, "it is my choice," and teaching others how to live, rather than understanding self and others to live a better life for all. Certainly at this stage of our development, the 'will' has got an upper hand in everyone's mind, though I am still destined to the 'destiny.'

Will continue with this kind of topic later sometimes. 

Thank you all for sharing, and please keep sharing.

Suresh, you are such a good moralist that I was destined to read your comment.

Thank you Rita, you and a few others confirm that I am not insane.

Love you and all!

Suresh

But I think one line from destiny to will is not enough, better to make a cross with chance and necessity. That makes it more real.

Also the whole thing is carried by synchronicity, so there is no distance or time between it in the implicate order, only in the explicate order the hesitations start.

Suresh,

Expressions like ''Western world'' are very slitppery because the west is far from being united.  Some western value are totally opposed to other western value, some western value tries to overturnes other.  In renaissance human dignity and liberty was an important value.  Nobody since then has directly opposes those but in practice since the rise with the new money religion the only human dignity that western societies provides is those afford by money.  Money is the new god.  It directly goes agains human freedom, individuality and dignity but the worshipper of the gospel of greed stay silent on this.  You always have to quitly burry the old religions.  It is now becoming the universal religion, the one that do not make any difference between culture, values, races because it does not care about anything except money. All you need to adopt it is to learn arithmetic.

Moreover Rita, aren't we the result of this implicate order made up into the explicit order from the 'time and distance' and thus the differences in our being for us to remain confused searching for the Truth.

However, your 'chance' and 'necessity' is just another issue created by us to satisfy our successes and failures, as are 'destiny' and 'will' in an ordinary Jo Blo of our time who has nothing but to run after food, shelter and clothing (money). But then that becomes 'judgment' and I wish to stay away from' judging' (difficult however).

Thanx for a very good input in your second line (paragraph). Appreciate it.

Regards

Yes Louis

Very right. Monetary system of economy brings with it greed, artificial scarcity giving increasing profit to the cunning profiteers, debt to the general public, foreclosures and mortgage sales affecting the public that falls within the 90% of the population, forcing governments to fail in the 'little' world that has abundant resource of fossil fuel, abundant to destroy and then reconstruct and rule with the worst form of 'slavery' (economic slavery) that it brings where the slaves need not even be fed, clothed, or sheltered as is necessary in physical slavery, and the list goes on.

The worst we have yet to come ...almost all countries are under debt, a massive economic collapse in on the way and that would be the time for horrendous chaos and then a new era (hopefully) of resource based economy would start. All goods and services would be free for all. Human beings would live to live and love, develop newer technologies for better healthcare, education and social good that would not be there to sell, or for profit, but for the inborn human passion for development (in place of getting rich individually) to get rich collectively.

I am really very happy Louis to bring the topic under this question of 'destiny' and 'will'. A one liner to that as follows:

Looking at the present world all our 'destiny' is the result of our fragmented 'will' for self as it is linked to the monetary system of economy that is fundamentally wrong and self perpetuating. Not only our 'will' will change, but our 'destiny' will also change if we understood good for all is certainly better for individuals ...

Love your answer Louis!!

Problem it seems to me, is the statement; "if you don't understand math, you don't understand anything" Human thinking transcends math, not all human thinking is explainable through math. One might easily dismiss human thinking just because it's full of perceptual bias interpretation. but to explain human thinking transcends math, at least for now. Although i am a loss to truly explain why we buy into illusions such as money, one thing seems to be true. Humans can only cope with a certain amount of reality, a certain amount of destiny, a certain amount of will.

Thanx Ralph for your cool input.

Your statement that "humans can only cope with a certain amount of reality (whose reality?), a certain amount of destiny (whose?), and a certain amount of will (whose will?)" is understandable. 

"if you don't understand math, you don't understand anything" statement indicates that there is only one way to understand anything. I wonder what would you call an ant's understanding, or an ape's understanding, or understanding of humans before maths was invented?

I feel, and know that many others do too, that there are many ways and means to look at (for example) the bones; feel them, XRay them, CT scan them, MRI scan them, and many more ....you do not need mathematics as the only thing to understand everything, is how many people think and feel. This doesn't mean you are not right. You are right because your mathematical path is also a valid path and so is the philosophical path and so is the path of action and the path of wisdom, etc. 

Destiny is destiny and will is will and they have the same meaning as has been given to them by various seers of knowledge. This meaning given to them is being explored by us. We are trying to dissecting the words to find the meaning behind the meaning. Like many things in life, we fail to know the truth, the true meaning as truth itself is a mirage for many.

Thank you once again

Suresh

Human have a very special nature in the sense that human's nature is very plastic and human lives mostly into a cultural world of their making.  We have almost (98%) the same genetic and bodily capacities as chimps but we have since a few hundred thousand years started to build our cultural worlds.  When we step in a temple or cathedral we not only step in a particular physical environment but also step into a particular cultural environment where a certain cultural world is manifested by the artists that have conceived  and ornated this place.  When we act , we do not act in physical environment only but in cultural environments and most of our work have both a physical and a cultural dimension. We are influenced by these cultural webs but also actors of their creation.  Since we are billion and live only a few years we might feel that we should not even try to change this web even when we see so many tragedies that could be avoided if the web would be just slightly modified.  But even slight modification seem way beyond the range of an individual.  But this is simply ignoring that maybe million of individuals are just as horrified than yourself in front of these unessary tragedies and are just waiting to be told what to do for stopping this.  We cannot change everything at once, only small steps but significant ones can be done but from those a renewed sense of our collective power to change the web we thread ourself for ourself.

A beautiful expression, Louis, thanx!

To add to it I would like to say that not only us, the humans but most other (scared to say all others) species have the same physical normal, physical emergency and cultural world of their own. We have no sense to understand them, or shall I say no time to get out of our own shackles of life and living to try to understand them.

Nevertheless, one realises these things only when one looks for answers. For general public, before TV and Richard Attenborough, the animal kingdom (etc.) were just meant to be our subordinates (for our pleasure/hunting) and were not intelligent, humane, cultured and social beings, at least not as good as our species, as important as our species (probably because they did not sit on the dining chairs and tables at dinner time).

Deep down our species' understanding today, we are the only species I believe that knowingly following a path towards everyone's (not only our) destruction by causing destruction of our saviour, our environment. We are the only species that has segregated ourselves from our society and family. We are the only one who believe in individuality without universality. Hardly ever we endeavor to work for all, we work for self and that too, not for self in real sense, but for money in essence. We are the only species who calls money as prosperity and money as life.

It is like saying, we are already on the path of destruction why talk of destiny and, or will.

I am happy the topic is picking up beautiful thought and expression by all the sharing and caring scientific world.

Thanx all!!

Suresh,

On the surface this big system we create to feed ourself and which we participate in to feed ourself is feeding on ourself and our planet and the situation seems desperate.  If we take the pain to raise the head above the water and look at where we are going, we realize that we are going towards the cliff and not only we are heading towards it but pushing on the gas and accelerating.  Not even any attempts at decelerating nor even discussing the situations seriously.  Look at these head of states debating about climate changes.  It is evident that the issues does not interest them and that they do not feel compel to do real change.  A small bomb in Paris, London or New York and now they are really serious about it.  THat we are accelerating ,the seven billion of us towards the cliff, this does not bother them.  Billions of dollars are spend on lobbies that denied the human effects on climate changes.  

The above should not create the false impression that we can do nothing about it.  Actually this evidence that we are going towards the cliff and this evidence that our current worldwide politico-economic social arrangement are doing nothing about it is the ground of fermentation of the evidence of the need for change.  When such evidence become widespread then the situation become ready for fundamental changes.  But we should resist too big changes because they create chaos.  We should do small significant steps always beginning by removing the worst practices for the planet and for the most underprivileg human being on this planets and taking steps for the care of all the children.  Tuning/focusing on the areas of worst suffering for the planet and the humans is the only way to go.  A medical approach for a very sick patient.,

What do you think Doctor Suresh?  Is the diagnostic right?

Brilliant Sir Louis the great, thanx for sharing the thoughts, making me and possibly many happy that there is hope ...will come back to you with some related thought a bit later (daily chores).

We as human species, even today can do wonders if we had no reason to be motivated to maximise our monetary wealth, if there was motivation to live and let live, if our motivation was better technology abandoning running after money ....and how? Will discuss soon.

Great to have known you, Sir.

I'm not so sure Louis,

"What a tangled web we weave, when first we set out to deceive."

As you say, we construct our own environment and species are a product of thier environment. We are therefore evolving ourselves. DNA is not destiny, our success is not based on accuracy of reality but on, this plastinated adaptability.

This is a gift and a curse, ours to buy into the illusion we are Gods or just another cog, debatably an important cog but still only a cog of many.

i think we would be a lot happier if we didn't take ourselves so seriously yet others views very seriously indeed. Our views are our own, and full of humour from dissonance, bias and contradictions that should be self laughed at. whereas the views of others, should be taken very seriously, as those views can loose its humour through self importance and is the true root of all suffering.

Our choice to create heaven or hell on earth. We all eat and wear products from human trafficking and slavery. So how much reality can you handle? And what are you really prepared to do about it?

Anyone here ever noticed the term, United Nations, is a contradiction in terms? if it's United, it's one nation, not nations!

Imagine no countries. 

A destiny is the one that is infact created as a result of one's action rightly told as Karmaphala which we don't have any control over. The will is the part that we have control over and is necessary to do an action. The result of an action may or may not be favourable to anyone. For example a speech regarding an alcoholism given by anyone will surely find praise in those women who are wives of drunkards but arrogance or hatred in case of those who accompany their husbands. Irrespective of the effect that it generates on the audience the one who is giving speech will always speak with a very strong intention of doing it because of the will. It is for the individual to decide whether he has to speak or not and that depends on the strength of his will while the effect of the speech may be either positive or negative which is according to the people gathered to hear him. This is destiny. Will is dependent on the strength of the individual to face a given situation while the destiny is the collective effect of many factors that determine the situation.

Ralph,

We tend to think ourself in these two extremes: Gog vs Cog and the two extreme feed each other.  Those proning a machine world into which we are a cog are the creator/God of this machine world given that they are the one creating it in their mind. So they pride themself to be both Cog and God.  You are right to our true nature is plasticity and so it is almost self-contradictory to say that and it is both our gift and our curse.  It imposes on us to define ourself and to thread this web of relations and significances onto which we are suspended as Weber was saying. Money has evolved considerably since its antique invention. It is not simply a unit of exchange, an harmless unit to establish equivalence and to foster commerce.  In modern time, money is created from a debt, a promess to pay with interest.  So all the financial weath is a vast commitment to pay the debt, a vast slavery system.  England invented it and was the first world wide colonial world wide economical industrial system.  It is a vast financial power system that Marx had predicted would invariably concentrated capital and fewer and fewer hands and in Capital in the Twenty-First Century Thomas Piketty‎ has established without any contest so far that effectively it is what is happening.  There was only a brief period of reverse of that trend due to the two world wars but now the trend is on track and now contrary to the first phase of capitalist, the colony is the whole world.  Democracy has remain juridically but has been gradually emptied from its meaning in the west and the emptying is continuing.  Look as the last Greek referendum, it took only 10 days for the finantial power to reverse the democratic power.

Impressively put Louise

May I ask, do you think all progress is a myth or are thier signs of growth, is thier hope for humans, do we in reality have any humanity or is that all illusory and social conditioning?

Ralph,

The modern myth of progress that was created in the enlightment has a basis of truth which cannot be denied, an increase in the human understanding and control of nature and this has progressed and will to continue to progress BUT it is a myth that such progress automatically translated in more human dignity and freedom.  The control over nature has gradually transformed into a control over all humans by a few. And since the control of the world wide society and now in the hand of a tiny money based aristocracy now what benefit the few at the expense of the vast majority is always done almost without exception.  This is not new.  It is new for the middle class in the West but it had been the norm in the colonial territories what is new is that it is so clear in our face.  Now to hide the evident truth there are multiple ways to divert the attention of the masses: terrorists, economic crisis, natural disasters,wars,mass entertainment.  Each crisis is used to justify one more leap towards the cliff. THis is called the shock doctrine.  For real social progress, ecological preservation and florishing of our planet we have to gradually regain control of the world societies for the common good always focusing on alievating the worst first in pragmatic ways. Here is the kind of political approach we need:

The Task of Political Theory by

Roberto Mangabeira Unger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYhljV2sVsY

What is Wrong with the Global Financial System? by Philip Goodchild

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjHmDGEB0ck

These are not solutions but solid voices among others that are pointing in the right directions about where our problems come from and where should we search solutions.

Regards

Paul Tudor Jones claims the cliff is, Revolution, War or Higher Taxes. Is that how you see it? He quotes Adam Smith, once justice is removed from corporate behaviour, humanity crumbles to dust.

although justice is Something to strive for, like meritocracy it's not possible.?

thank you in advance for the links I will study them tomorrow.

regards

Ralph,

What is threatening us is a total collapse of all economies, all ecological systems, and basically a collapse of civilisation.  We are even threated biologically by genetic manipulations of the human genome for eugenic purposes.  I am not talking about a little thing here but a collapse as we have never seen.  No civilisation was as fragile as our global technological civilisation.  We cultivated interdepencies on a massive scale and if it collapse , it will collapse and is not going to recover in an forseable future.  I do not want to waist my time exploring the worst collapse scenario but to spend my energy exploring how it can be avoided.

Love your discussion Louis, Ralph and Mahesh

Just to try clarify your doubts:

Imagine the Federal banks, the Central banks, the Reserve banks and their fractional reserve policy had not been there. Only the resource based economy was there. No one would profit from anything as the profit is linked to money as resource. The more the real (not money) resource would be available, the more cheaper the resource would become, hence betterment of the masses. Example; air is available all over and no one can control as yet to distribute it, hence it is free. Similarly it used to be water as resource, but monetary system has partly encroached on it and we have started selling water now, be that in bottles or through meterage system in some cities.

I do not have to explain at this stage that money is the precursor of greed, scarcity, hinderance to technological development that includes health of the masses. Money production is the production of debt and debt is the precursor to slavery, slavery of the most sinister kind where slaves have no rights, and, or no say by the law that is necessary to keep this slavery in tact. A mother getting a pie for her little child from a store without paying for it is sent to jail, whereas a minister of the crown stealing from the public through his official credit card flying on a jumbo jet and buying 5000$ pair of shoes for his girl friend (not wife) is acceptable in law (Natural Injustice). Who is to blame? Monetary system of economy where corruption is built in the system itself.

Now imagine again that there was no monetary system of economy, and it was only resource based economy, there was no IMF, no World Bank and no Central/Reserve/Federal banks. Imagine if all resources were maximised and were free for all when needed. 

People in this scenario would be motivated to do what they are meant to do for their leisure, pleasure and general good to get name and fame. Name and fame not for money but for recognition. Everyone will respect everyone else for what the other has provided them with. Technology would develop to save lives overnight, as there would be no need for duplication and no need to slow the pace being unlinked to monetary gain. There would be groups working together in one and the other field and the progress would be exponential.

Will continue with bits and pieces later.

You would not need fossil fuel, but would get solar, wind and wave energy for everyone at no cost (everything is free, like air and water). It is no one's property, but is everyone's property. Any scientific/technological development would be for the masses, no need for patents, protection, price links, etc. etc.

Moreover, your destiny would become everyone's destiny and everyones will would become your will. I hope I have not left you bewildered being a second language english speaker.

Love you all!

Suresh

Hi Louis,

sorry for delay, your Unger and Goodchild opened up a can of worms, that is to say a Goldman-Sachs. i had no idea how bad it really was, these guys seemed to be through being devoid of any conflict of interest, creating a funnel up system, fuelling the largest gap in promotional wealth. the bottom 40% of the worlds population have 0.3% of the wealth, the top 20% have 83% of the wealth. The top 20 families own more than the bottom 100 countries. Can this be true? Where GS can force Greece into its debt crisis by loaning them money they were never going to be able to afford.

it seems the question is not can we stop the train from the precipice but what can we do when it does crash?

Will, Fate and Destiny! very depressing.

Hi Ralph, well said!

Top 20 families have the Will, or shall we say 'scheming' power, bottom 100 countries have Destiny and that is the Fate for all of us ...can also be summarised as, "other's Will is our fateful Destiny ....

Thanx for ongoing wonderful contribution by all.

Suresh

Ok, so having given this some more thought and a lot of research, I've come to the conclusion that the question of fate, will, destiny is a red-herring or rather a distraction. It's not the point because it's just the mechanics of why we do stuff not the stuff it's self. The stuff it's self is, what makes us human? Fate, will, destiny I'm sure is to some degree in other species.

im with the conclusion that what makes us unique is unlike any other, "we cooperate in large number with flexibility". It appears that no other species does this.

at the moment RG is full of high powered intellectuals that neuance to the enth degree, I'm certainly guilty of this. If RG evolved into a brains trust, where we all put our heads together to solve the ubiquitous problem, I'm sure we can come up with a solution but I do think it's takes a great many minds to do this, because the quthe simpleestion is so complex and thier is a strength in consensus.

and so the question is...

if there is a unifying theory where all people (of a sound mind) no matter what thier belief system is, what would that unifying theory be?

The simple answer would be survival, there is nothing more motivational to bring people together that's a common goal or even enemy. If we we are being attacked by green men from Mars, it's likey the world will drop most if not all differences to defeat the common goal, whether green aliens, climate change, earth colliding meteor, pandemic virus. Problem with all these scenarios is, our backs have to against the all to   realise, we have more in common, than our differences and those diffences tend to only be personal preferences, choices of what we chose to believe. There comes a problem when some try to state those beliefs are facts that we should all be live but that aside, we still have loads in common.

Anyway, beyond immediate survival, and a bit of future planing to avoid man made abuses, what would that unified theory be?

on a less cater-strophic level perhaps the answer is children? There is a song who's lyrics go,

"I believe the children are our future,

teach them well and let them lead the way."

well, any of you that are parents know, a freshly steaming babies nappy is defiantly in the here and now! Children are not our future, they are right here and right now. So one would think every decision we make for the world would be for thier benefit, yet that does not seemed to the case. Why is this, at the end of the day, procreation is also a form of genetic survival

Enjoyment motivates people to participate in the sharing economy

Sustainability and enjoyment are at least as important as economic benefits for participating in the sharing economy.

People are motivated to participate in the sharing economy because of its ecological sustainability, the enjoyment derived from the activity, the sense of community, and saving money and time. Ecological sustainability is one of the basic principles of the sharing economy -- not to purchase everything individually but rather consumer collaboratively by sharing goods and services. Another canonical principle of the sharing economy is 'paying it forward'. However, collaborative consumption may involve the same hurdles as any other type of green consumption, researcher from the Finnish Aalto University have found in a recently published study.

Consumers commonly wish to tie ecological attitudes and consumption habits to their identity as well as to talk positively about green consumption, but these talks do not necessarily translate into action. The Aalto University study shows that there may be some discrepancy in terms of the link between positive attitudes related to the sharing economy and actual participation in it.

- Moreover, participating in the sharing economy can, in many cases, become even more expensive and complicated than 'normal' consumption. However, there are many factors, not only the price, that steer the consumer selection of marketplaces and exchange methods,' says the first author of the article Hamari. The research was recently published in the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.

Journal Reference:

Juho Hamari, Antti Ukkonen. The Sharing Economy: Why People Participate in Collaborative Consumption. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2013; DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2271971

Dear Dr. Suresh Vatsyayann,

God has a destiny for our lives, but He won’t force it on us. God’s will is not automatic. He allows us to make choices. Many of the things that happen to us are not God’s perfect will. We all have to choose between God’s will and our willingness. 

And, this is what the zeast of teachings of all the religions.  

MAY GOD BLESS US  A VERY HAPPY, HEALTHY AND PROSPEROUS YEAR 2016.

Thanx Afaq

Life is strange, and our understandings of life and living change as a result of interaction of our inner self and intricately entwined environment.

Could it be that my 'Will' is my 'Destiny' and my 'Destiny' is my 'Will' ?

May everyone's Destiny and Will work in harmony in the year 2016 and beyond, and also for the next two days.

Regards

Suresh

Yes George, and thanx for pointing it out.

However, God whom we could refer to with any name (e.g. Nature almighty/Totality/ the One and Only/the Truth/\Nature (God)etc. cannot be separate from any of us. That is likely why God could be omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent, or infinite. or all-inclusive. S/He/It cannot be complete without anything outside it, or it would be called incomplete if we are not in Him.

In that light and in our scientific/logical/philosophical thinking unreal has no existence and real never ceases to be, we cannot destroy anything, nor produce anything from nothing ...e=mc2 kind of logic.

If that be true, or acceptable at the present time, then this cycle of birth and death, transformation from plutonium to platinum and big bangs and shrinkage to black holes, rebirth, etc. etc. cannot be Willed by someone sitting outside us, but by us all, collectively called God/Nature/Truth/etc.

We all (inanimate and animate, known or unknown) that collectively form God, are using the inborn forces of God in us individually thinking we are the doers, yet we are destined to carry out our inborn Will. The end result of all the Wills becomes Destiny for some and Will for others.

Thank you all for sharing your own insight in to this debate. It has given some fantastic ideas to me and my unripe mind and soul ...please keep me stimulated.

Merry Xmas and a Happier New Year to all!

With Love and Regards

Suresh