Dear Ting et all, 

For me i agree with this: "the chance or fate will depend on the decisions of all the individuals involved in the action and on not man controlled events".

In 25 abril 1974 in Portugal there was a revolution. I was a teenager and i participated in policy.

I intended to follow physical but the choices I made have led me to business management.

I loved statistics and econometrics, so i did a master's degree and a doctorate in these fields., and after that i become reading and studying about this fields.

IAt a certain time in my life i traveled to  Wales where I studied marketing and met very interesting people with whom i still do research. I became interested also  in the consumer behaviour  and i started studying about children and the human brain ,and mental diseases in order to better understand the human being, because i want to know the connection between  childhood and our live as adults.

The diversity of subjects that involved me still today appear very useful. But each time i have the oportunity to learn more, more i understand how small i am.

If was not for the April 25, 1974 perhaps today my way had been another...

But i am responsible for everything that happen to me. In this way, i want to change always to become a better person. I am very pleased to meet so nice people in RG.

Thank you

Helena

I do believe that my life is controlled by the Almighty.  But I have been made a logical being who should use my mind and good sense to decide how I should live and what I should do.  Since the gifts of conscience are God given, I must take a responsible part in my actions that decided the course of my life.  So I would say that my life is a product of God's sovereign will as well as my human responsibility.  Some people might nickname the first part as 'fate'.  In my family, it was my lot (and of another cousin) to stay on to take care of the old folks, while several other cousins left to work in UK.  It was a decision that radically changed my life, and sometimes I wondered if I would make the same decision again.

Everyone must know his life thanks to his performance and so every action is a reaction in the same direction.So we have about anything in your life that I want to do good and to do good things with the strong will to do it and then assess the context for our lives and deal with the effects of others.

This is of course the fundamental question we all face - do we act the way we do because we want to, or do we act the way we do because we have to (causality - genetics, epigenetics, and conditioning). If we believe there is such a thing as "free will", then how do we prove it?

There is nothing like rationality, carefulness or perfection in human decisions, men are born to make mistakes in choices without knowing the depth of their consequences - flaws make us human. Whether wrong or right, man is the sole designer of his fortune. 

I have had several ups and downs, and whenever  I looked back I always found out two links

Though I'm not a Buddhist but with some Buddhism teachings I've read, I have a better understanding of what I can decide

A specific case i.e. opportunity is important. Recognizing, catching, and utilizing the opportunity successfully will change the life. Then opportunity becomes fate!

Two facts changed my life as I utilized the relevant opportunity:

1. Decision regarding pursuing University teaching career

2. Pursuing research in management -- resultant received National lifetime teaching and research award in commerce and management (by competitive entries)

Dear Arno,

were you born in Florence? I'm jocking I know that Arno is a German name.

About your further question

Fate or destiny provides a deterministic approach and assumes that there is a destiny for each human being (you are destined to become a bum even if you were born prince; instead you become a movie star even if you can not play, etc.). Accordingly, there is not a free will. 

The case is materialized as a result of a series of circumstances given by the synchronicity of human actions and decisions of people involved (car accident, nee law against or in favor etc.) or the occurrence of events which man can not control: eruption of volcano, flood etc.

Dear Ting et all, 

For me i agree with this: "the chance or fate will depend on the decisions of all the individuals involved in the action and on not man controlled events".

In 25 abril 1974 in Portugal there was a revolution. I was a teenager and i participated in policy.

I intended to follow physical but the choices I made have led me to business management.

I loved statistics and econometrics, so i did a master's degree and a doctorate in these fields., and after that i become reading and studying about this fields.

IAt a certain time in my life i traveled to  Wales where I studied marketing and met very interesting people with whom i still do research. I became interested also  in the consumer behaviour  and i started studying about children and the human brain ,and mental diseases in order to better understand the human being, because i want to know the connection between  childhood and our live as adults.

The diversity of subjects that involved me still today appear very useful. But each time i have the oportunity to learn more, more i understand how small i am.

If was not for the April 25, 1974 perhaps today my way had been another...

But i am responsible for everything that happen to me. In this way, i want to change always to become a better person. I am very pleased to meet so nice people in RG.

Thank you

Helena

Man is born and multiple it is never the same each passing moment. Indeed, the choice of life is associated with many context. The choice of our life when we wanted a child and different to that of our youth or adulthood. The child is chosen by the recklessness that simple desire. By cons during our youth the choice of our life is not only in our desire but also according to our ability and our environment. As a child who loved animals I always wanted to be a veterinarian. Later after high school I chose another field other than veterinary because of my sensitivity to see the suffering of animals. But whatever my choice I was predestined to study because not only by love but by my ability to do the  

Dear @Marg, as in case of  your student and Cornell University, I had a situation that radically has changed my life. In 1982, I came back from US (GWU - Washington DC) after Ph.D studies, in order to join army. I was 27 years old and this was the last year according to the law to serve army forces. But, I have got perforated ulcer in my stomach, and authorities brought the decision that I do not have to serve army at all!!!

I have prepared to get back to US where I had a job waiting for at the University, but I was told in US Embassy that I am not eligible to enter US for next 3 years for the reason which was unknown to me at that time. I had a Fulbright scholarship and Contract with American Government predicted that student after finishing his study must serve in domicile country for 3 years! I was shocked. 

Dear @Marg and friends, read contracts carefully! 

I have stayed in Yugoslavia (read Serbia now) forever!

The wisdom goes as "God will help those who help themselves". In my opinion, changing my life in the past & in the future was & will be mostly according to my choice & free will followed by God's help. The cases, in which fate intervenes, are the exceptions rather than the main rule. After becoming an adult, each one of us becomes responsible for the majority of his/her decisions & actions. When I was a school teacher 40 years ago, a man used to come to school with a bag of money to give the monthly salaries to my mates & me. Only one armed policeman used to accompany him. Had a gang of 3 or more armed men knocked them down & stole the bag, then our fate (as teachers) would have been to wait for another dispatch of money or after the gang was caught but this never happened during my service for 3 years. In under-developed countries, such as ours, the fate has been unfairly blamed for many results of negligent & lazy actions, e.g. in hospitals, to ward off accountability.

wise answers and expertise for each of you is highly evident.

Effects of causality, results up on which we consciously act up on reasons of what we want to become (causes) determine what we are now today for most of us. But with that as a principle, there are cases also which are results of fate - things that appear instantly in front of us that force us to make decisions for a  change of our direction of action and desires without prior intentions or plans.

A person who won a mega million lottery definitely changes his/her life due to fate while a scientist who grew up studying science with a predetermined goal of becoming a s scientist built his progression of what he/she wants to become through conscious actions of a cause - effects of causality. 

Serendipity for instance is a typical example of discovery by fate, the orientation of the universe in a certain direction is a result of fate not of causality. 

Dear Ting et al.

The choice of life is associated with many context and depends on the decisions of all people.

I am responsible for everything that happens to me . Therefore, I always want to change to become a better person . In these last years, I resigned my position in the industry for my current workstation ...

I would answer by referring to my Catholic faith that changed my life. Thanks to my parents, I attended Catholic schools and even University at the undergraduate level at that time. I had a change of mind when completing my first degree in Travel and Tourism and got an insight into the behaviours of some tourists/guests in this industry. I decided I did not want to be paid with money made by spoiling others rotten even when it is not good for their health and well being (e.g., drinking over the limit). I am happy with my decision and saw it as God's will for me to be where I am now.

Best regards,

Debra

 Dear @Ljubomir,

you have my human compehention! Do not believe you are the only one.

In Italy are decades that no one can transfer himself from one university to another. So the one who has the good fortune to begin in a prestigious university, manages to stay there forever although it is scarce scientifically, while another excellent is forced perhaps to imprisonment in a small university with few resources.

Some transfers are made, but only by a high level of patronage.

@ Lewis Kausel 

Absolutely, kausel...

Dear Ljubomir,

Your story was interesting but it was not the effect of the fate. You might have not focused on a contract. I stress in that time contracts in socialistic countries were not everyday events. It is easy to understand your optimistic behaviour.  

Dear Ljubomir,

Your story was interesting but it was not the effect of the fate. You might have not focused on a contract. I stress in that time contracts in socialistic countries were not everyday events. It is easy to understand your optimistic behaviour.  

Dear Ting,

Life is too complicated, its parameters are difficult to be recognised, thus we make often blind decisions. Thus, many think that chance as unforeseen and capricious power of fate rules our life. Others think that “our” personality may have a secrete ability to find always the best/worst opportunity and the happiness/failure is built in our basic reactions to the environment.

This is also a fine pretext not to make efforts and to blame the fate and circumstances.

I personally know that I have not made often the socially almost compulsory compromises, which had unpleasant consequences.  Is this a fate? I thought always that I have had to follow my principles and not to build a career.  

My life was totally effected -once upon a time. This question is really hard to answer without realization.

I had  a near fatal  car accident during  my college  days which i still  don't  believe  ,how i survived it...it has changed  my Outlook towards  life 

I fully  agree  to Barbara. .its a mixture  of  intelligence of ones choices and destiny which  one cannot  struggle  against. How early  in life  one understands this concept  makes all the difference between  a  happy life and a struggling  one. .

Dear @Roland and RG fellows,

truly amazing your own assertion that you were the ONLY architect of your life  and that chance, destiny and fate did not have any role.

In a life, unexpected events happen to everyone and anyone (very few) and are decisive. The man is not in an ivory tower or in an experiment with static conditions. He is in a changing world where everyone acts and operates, even natural events.

It may be that until you have been in the eye of the hurricane and you came out unscathed either by luck (unexpected positive events) or bad luck (unexpected negative events).

If it were really so, have you not missed the real opportunity to be in communion with the mankind and with society and to improve or worsen yourself?

With empathy

Ting Fa Marg

I am my family are understanding the nature of my work and my interests, and I share my time between my family and my interests and work. Accordingly, there are no problem for me.

Mainz, Germany

Dear Ting et al,

I've looked through, and I found many good answers to your question --and a good deal of wisdom. But I found no detailed discussion of the concept of "fate" or "circumstance."

That there are regularities and laws of the world, and that circumstances beyond our knowledge and control affect us, I think no one doubts. Again, no one can really foresee all the consequences of what they may do. Those consequences may also arise from laws and regularities of the world or from circumstances beyond our knowledge and control. But on the other hand, it is hard to imagine a world in which each had unlimited personal power, and, say, the wish of a child could bring down the sun.

What argues with and directly confronts the ancient concept of fate, however, is the thesis that "knowledge is power." Clearly, we cannot ever do all that we may want to do, and there are always limitations to the power of each to act in the world and accomplish what they may desire. But this very fact of limitation shows us, too, that there is always some (limited) power. (I invite readers to understand "power" on the model of "virtue," "excellence:") Knowledge, then takes the mass of undifferentiated fate and circumstances and breaks it down into specific laws and conditions, relevant to action. By acquiring knowledge, then, we may each increase the scope of viable action and expand the role of personal power in life. While we never can totally escape limitation, lacking omnipotence and omniscience, it is always possible, within life and health, to ameliorate present conditions, limitations, and circumstances. 

From this and similar perspectives, it is plausible to view over-emphasis on "fate" and personal limitation as a kind of metaphysics or ideology of passivity. That is what is usually implied by use of the term "fatalism." This is a passive attitude in the face of life's difficulties and circumstances. It is often shadowed by an esoteric doctrine of freedom--freedom for the few and passivity for the many. This, we expect, enhances the power of the few. 

On the other hand, we know well that we have not personally created the natural or social worlds in which we live, and that we have each, in some degree, arisen from social worlds and have adapted to them--each to his own social world in particular. My point is that in view of socialization and rootedness in some particular society, instead of viewing the mass of circumstances as a dreaded impediment, a "fate" which stalks us, one might also take the view that our existing social and natural worlds are unsuspected source of succor and support. In this way, one may transform the ancient doctrine of "fate" and passivity into a contemporary conception of natural grace --adjoined to growing knowledge and power.  After all, who would think, whatever their accomplishments, that they have done it all from their own power alone? Even Newton had it that he "stood on the shoulders of giants."

H.G. Callaway

• not at all but surely

Dear RG friends,

Please help me in this case.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_death

Sincerely,

Gharavi

Mainz, Germany

Dear Gorgels,

An interesting, comment, I think; and one worthy of some examination, in view of the thesis that "knowledge is power."

You wrote:

Medical science has gone a long way to collect knowledge in order to eliminate bacteria and the infections caused by them. Since a few years however, knowledge of nature appears to be larger than the medical progress and, nowadays, medical science is confronted with resistant bacteria caused by the limitation of previous knowledge. It is a dangerous dilemma. The progress may be a set-back after all and the world be confronted with much more severe bacterium-caused illnesses than ever before. Painting the devil on the wall, I agree. But "what they saw is not what they got": they got the opposite of what they wanted... Why didn't they think of it?

---end quotation

It strikes me, in the first place, that it would be more accurate to say that medical science "has gone a long way to collect knowledge to" control bacteria "and the infections caused by them." I think it has only rarely been the objective of anti- bacterial treatments to eliminate bacteria --or, in particular, to eliminate all bacteria in the environment or in a patient. Contemporary doctrine has it, in any case, that we each have more bacteria in us then we have our own distinctive cells, and the idea of eliminating them appears foreign to this perspective.

The genuine challenge of your posting, however, concerns the phenomenon of resistant bacteria, which do cause dangerous infections, and which are difficult or impossible to control with the current arsenal of anti-bacterial drugs and treatments. In consequence, whatever the exact details of this situation, it appears that the anti-bacterial solution to one kind of problem has given rise to a new problem, hitherto unknown and n newly encountered. It seems true, as well, that if earlier medical practitioners had been better aware of the problem of unintentionally cultivating resistant strains, then they might have acted to avoid the problems associated with them. 

However, I think your statement is too strong, when you say that "what they saw is not what they got" and "they got the opposite of what they wanted." It seems to the point to emphasize, then, that many lives have been saved, over many decades, by the use of a great variety of antibiotics. Many more will doubtlessly be saved in the future, by the use of the same or of new antibiotics. So, the new problems associated with resistant strains have not totally negated the success of the past use of these drugs, though they do suggest more prudent and limited use of them--and perhaps other changes in medical practice as well.  That a problem has found some solution in the advance of knowledge can not plausibly be interpreted to mean that no new problems will arise or even that new solutions will not give rise to new problems. The word is indeed a very complicated place, and the idea of the dissolution of "fate" by breaking it down into known laws and conditions, must be understood as accommodating the complexities. I assume that there are no absolutely final and ever-lasting solutions to human problems in general. That is part of the meaning of "to ameliorate."

You say, in conclusion that "Lack of human knowledge is a natural constant as is fate for that sake." But, it seems clear that this can only mean that we never know everything. If that is what you mean, then I think we must agree. But that does not mean that new knowledge will not become available to solve problems of our immediate concern: such as the problem of resistant bacteria. In consequence, it seems clear that lacking omniscience, we are always limited. But requiring omniscience and omnipotence to beat back the ancient dogma of "fate," seems to place the goal impossibly high --and unreasonable, especially if this would lead us to acquiesce in solvable problems and ignore the possibilities of growing power and virtue, in nature and in society.

H.G. Callaway

Mainz, Germany

Dear Gorgels,

Many thanks for your thoughtful and forthcoming reply. I think there can be no doubt that "the best made plans of mice and men often go astray" --as the old saying has it. But, of course, that is not reason to avoid the task of taking up the best plans of which we may be capable. The broad use of antibiotics was once a very good plan, given the limitations of knowledge at the time. But now we know to be more circumspect of the possibility of cultivating resistant strains of bacteria. In any case, what I object to is the notion that we should avoid deploying our best plans, just because "something or other might go wrong." The mere possibility of untoward consequences is not a good reason to avoid using the best knowledge we have available at a given time. Such "mere possibility" is constant, so it argues against nothing in particular. 

I notice that you persist in the use of the term "fate," in spite of my objections. But let me reformulate your question: Do "ways exist to position oneself positively around [circumstances] so that one may "observe" the accident instead of "being subject to it"?

Well, in a way, of course, that is just the question I was addressing. See my prior posting. But I objected to mere passivity as a strategy. This includes the strategy of the passive observer. Admittedly, we cannot possibly anticipate everything that might go wrong. In the end, human intelligence is an experiment in nature.

Various strategies exist, no doubt, none completely foolproof. Can we act and will in such a way as to influence the future? Well, of course we can, and we do it every day, individually and collectively. Which plans might we best follow, given that we cannot foresee all possible circumstances? I think the best idea is to follow the plan you understand and can endorse in good conscience. "To thine own self be true," as the saying goes; and if you have serious, substantial doubts about some on-going project or plan, then it is generally best to say so--and to give the specific grounds of the doubt, sketching alternatives & etc. When in doubt, honesty is the best policy.  Don't "go along in order merely to get along." The effect of that, often enough, is simply to put off problems for others and other generations. 

I am sure this may seem doubtful and naive to some or lacking in cleverness. But that is my answer. In a way, it is a kind of responsibility, expressed as intellectual and moral integrity. It is a kind of responsibility, because, it attempts to examine even the most hardened and established prejudices and inclinations, which, often enough, are simply a particular manifestation of social or institutional politics seen through the lenses of outsiders and skeptics--a kind of politics which, often enough, refuses public examination. When philosophy examines popular prejudice, it performs an intellectual and democratic service.

No doubt, there are those intent upon routing out intellectual integrity, inducing passivity --and thereby making more room for the plans of the few. This approach is usually sold as "cleverness" and political adroitness. Most often, though, it expresses lack of courage and passivity in relation to various powers-that-be.

H.G. Callaway

Dear Roland,

The problem is that you have no control to prove statistically or any objective way that your decisions determined the events of your life. It would be useful to teach people how to form their life.  For example to teach refugees how to change their life conditions, the political system to have a normal life in their original country.

Dear @Marg, some answers to your thread got a few downvotes, precisely 13 downvotes for unknown reasons. Was it randomly or intentionally? Any idea?

Mainz, Germany

Dear Gorgels,

You ask several questions:

Would you be acceptant to deviating occurrences - deviating from your intentions? Would you go thru the wall to press your issue? Would you go at length and try to remove those that history (that future automatically becomes) has selected to be its instrument? Would you oppose to the war books written by history, that once was a future pregnant with decisions, or would you accept them as a wise man probably would do and seek ways for improvement. Would you install a tsunami warning system for tsunamis of the mind?

---end quotation

I am sure that I have no control or power over much that happens, say, the war going on in the east of Ukraine. So, if it were a matter of merely wishing, then I would stop it, but of course it is not a matter of wishing. Its going on, and I can't stop it.

Can I speak or write against it? Of course. What will be the ultimate effect of that? We have no way of knowing. It is like that with many issues of politics and policy. But the fact that we have no direct power to change the on-going events, does not imply that it is of no use to consider or debate a topic. The effect of scholarly debate is often indirect, and unsuspected. We can't control or organize it. It just happens. People read and debate and they make their decisions --beyond our knowledge or control. We may contribute to desired outcomes by persuasion, but we cannot possibly control who will be persuaded. 

So, what does it mean to ask, if one accepts "deviating occurrences - deviating from your intentions?" Does this imply endorsement? Does it imply "jumping on the bandwagon?" Or is this a question of simply recognizing the facts as they are, whether we like them or not? Things "deviate from our intentions" all the time. That's implied by saying that our powers are always limited. None of this tells us, however, that we cannot sometimes act to accomplish, or contribute to what we see as desirable or worthy of good efforts. 

A "a tsunami warning system for tsunamis of the mind" might be a good idea. It depends on what you may mean by this phrase. Sometime, I think, more skepticism is needed than people feel safe in expressing. But notice, on the contrary the resent debate on "existential questions" possibly effecting the long-term survival of the human race--these include the dangers or possible dangers involved in the creation of artificial intelligence.

Lastly,

you say,

I consider events to be fixed and that being instrumental to it is a desire that is sometimes satisfied, most times not; it differs per person and their destiny.

---end quotation

Frankly, this seems to merest dogma to me. Moreover, it seems inconsistent with other things that you say in the same positing, since you confess to forming intentions and acting to achieve particular ends. Supposing "events are fixed," how would you know this? By what means? Is your action a matter of purposeful ends and means when you set about to discover such things?

Moreover, how would you know, regarding particular events, that they are fixed? You must have some method of forecasting the future, not open to the rest of us. But when you set about to use, it, you must want to use it well and to best effect, in discovering how things will turn out. But all of this supposes that by intention and method you can find out what will happen, or even what has happened. You take this much intention and effect of intention for granted, and then turn around and say that it is all fixed--and beyond our powers? Why should anyone practice methodological discipline and method, if the results of what is done is all fixed in any case?  You seem to be involved in some kind of contradiction--pragmatic or otherwise. If all is fixed, then your methods and toil seem pointless. But, if they are not pointless, then whether you use them or not makes a difference in the world.

You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

H.G. Callaway

Mainz, Germany

Dear Gorgels,

Instead of answering challenges clearly given, you appear to retreat into some considerable obscurity. I am not surprised, since it seems clear that no rational defense is possible--only conformity to what is perceived as imperative and overwhelming.

By way of analysis, I would observe, here, that such a position is perhaps more compelling in a more socially uniform setting. Where I come from, such uniformity does not prevail, and in consequence, we have to debate and reason things out. Difference become apparent, and conformity to a supposed per-ordained end is not likely to be accepted easily or without dispute. There is that much social basis back home for the inclination to question and examine conformity, uniform expectation and dogma.

What has bothered me, from time to time, is that such inclination to question, examine and dispute, what some easily assume and propagate, will appear as a disadvantage from the perspective of a more uniform configuration. That situation, however, will not long persist, I think. Given globalization, people will find, eventually, that there are many different perspective in the world which are not being considered in any depth. Debate and examination of easy assumptions and political presuppositions is sure to grow. Once it becomes clear what is involved, who benefits from conformity, and what other arrangements may be possible, then the easy assumption of uniform expectations will decline.

The natural result will be a growth of respect for diversity of reasoned positions and  the exploration of possibilities, even when they tend to go against the grain. Here I make a prediction! Do I, then have "special access to the future?" Well, no, it is simply an extrapolation of historical trends. But, if I am right, then people will come to see that failure to risk a reasoned opinion, simply because of not knowing how things will turn out, is a disservice to the common good. In short, its an insiders game of seeking favor from other insiders --though the occasional outsider is also sometimes caught up in the myth and mystic.

H.G. Callaway

I'm a fatalist, Man proposes, but God disposes. Every human being -strong or weak, man or woman needs a hand.Even a good boat can't swim without water.In my difficult situations there were the kind human beings who saved me.I have never asked anybody, but they appeared.As for "cause-effect", to R.Tagore, "If your decency (efforts) is unacknowledged- however much you give- you'll get nothing in return for..Even if the sand of the desert is dazzling white, you can't sow there.Sow a black soil (chernozem), if you hope for reaping a very good return".The most infallible method is an influential uncle. The most fantastic one is a noble, far-sighted, without the instinct of lucre leader, free from the influences above and "grey eminence". The most fabulous is a wonder.It also depends on the surrounding people- they either help or hinder your efforts.Fate is associated with your birth in one or another family. Your place of residence, your marriage, your professional choice are associated with your values (ethical choice)- the irrational.The irrational defines your choice (free will).The main thing is to find "chernozem", but it's also a fate.

Nothing, in any time, did change radically my life. I try always to be (as much as I can) politically correct. However, I can never deny my principles and values.

See this answer of Marwan Obeidat to a Kamal RG question, Dear Margherita, which looks suitable for your question.

Dr. Kamal: “Is the statement "it's better to be lucky than smart" true? Do you believe in the luck factor for some researchers?”

Marwan M. Obeidat : ”Yes, I think there is a great deal of truism in what your question suggests, Dr. Kamal. May I remind you here of the old Arab woman saying prayers to her son: that “may he be bestowed with luck alone (rather than with anything else)," because, in her opinion, "those who have wisdom and good brains are created to serve the lucky ones!"”

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_the_statement_its_better_to_be_lucky_than_smart_true_Do_you_believe_in_the_luck_factor_for_some_researchers/2

Mainz, Germany

Dear Gorgels,

Many thanks for your kind words. But I cannot let you go without offering another of my favorite arguments on related topics. See what you think of the following:

I have in mind, Popper's argument against "historicism." The thesis is that it is impossible to predict the future course of human history. (This is not to say that we cannot extrapolate trends which are, themselves, subject to change.)

The argument is that the future course of history depends on the growth of knowledge, since the growth of knowledge effects what we will become able to do. But the future growth of knowledge is not open to prediction (and especially not by any historical method), since if there was any method for predicting the future growth of knowledge, then we wouldn't have to practice science or research generally, but could merely sit back and predict its outcomes. But that is absurd. We can only practice science, do our research, and wait to see how it will turn out. In consequence, we cannot predict the future course of history. (See Popper 1957, The Poverty of Historicism.)

The general idea, then, is that the growth of knowledge is itself a variable with wide ranging effects. The idea of predicting the course of human history seems to be an unwarranted generalization from our ability to extrapolate particular trends. But trends in human affairs are themselves open to change, particularly if we become aware of them. Moreover, human intervention in existing trends to counteract them is sometimes evident. Thus, the idea of any firm prediction and pre-determination is left unsupported. In that light fatalism amounts to acquiescence in malleable trends. (If I observe such acquiescence, I am somewhat inclined to ask, "Who benefits from continuing the trend?")

H.G. Callaway

Kafka said: “The randomness exists only in our heads, in our limited perception. It is a reflection of the limits of our knowledge. The struggle against randomness is always fighting against ourselves, a struggle in which we are never able to become winners” (this imperfect translation is from the Russian translation, sorry :-)). The "cases" have changed my life for better (people say) many times and without any visible reasons. Why?... May be, because I believed in that Better and wished it, and did my best for it. But is it a real "Better" for me, I'm not sure...

Fate without case can not change life!

Dear down voter,

Please, explain in the name of ratio your evaluation. I thought always that RG is a scientific forum where people discuss rationally events, problems and phenomena and not kick the other in the dark.

Mainz, Germany

Dear Bozsik,

I think you are within your rights to ask for a justifications. Your appeal to the need of rational justification is admirable. It helps maintain the quality of the discussions.

Still, the occasional negative vote doesn't seem to hurt the discussions too much. Perhaps it is better to think of it as an outlet for under developed discontent which might later be formulated more fully.

No one is likely to always evoked universal agreement, if they have any definite view at all, and this is a ground for tolerance. Someone "down voting" has said, in an inarticulate manner that they are not convinced. There need not be more to it than that, and much the same could be said of up voting.

Still, as you say, we reasonably prefer a more articulate response.

H.G. Callaway

Mainz, Germany

Dear Laguta,

You wrote:

Kafka said: “The randomness exists only in our heads, in our limited perception. It is a reflection of the limits of our knowledge. The struggle against randomness is always fighting against ourselves, a struggle in which we are never able to become winners”

---end quotation

Surely, the randomness we may attribute sometimes "exist only in our heads," but to say that randomness (or an increase in randomness) could only exist in our heads, or that it is always "a reflection of the limits of our knowledge," seems overly strong. Surely, sometimes there is disturbing randomness in the world or increasing levels of it, so that "the struggle against randomness" is not "always "fighting against ourselves." 

I recall the old saying that the word "we" is "the most ambiguous word in the language," or words to that effect. While I do not know the source, of your quotation from Kafka, I wonder if the ambiguities of "we" might help clarify his point.

H.G. Callaway

Dear H.G. Callaway,

I have always enjoyed your mature and balanced comments. Thanks. 

Dear Roland, thank you! The words with semantics of randomness are the keywords for Kafka's texts. Almost everything was random in his unstable, fragile world. The discourse of “cases” is his favorite form. I’ve quoted them from “Conversations with Kafka” by Gustav Janouch (its English translation: http://www.amazon.com/Conversations-Second-Edition-Directions-Paperbook/dp/081121950X; I’ve a Russian edition). It's a long story. The book was obviously titled by analogy with “Conversations of Goethe with Johann Peter Eckermann”. Janouch (thanks to his father or  by chance?) met Kafka and noted some conversations with him. Later, after the WWII, he found among his papers the copies of those notes and published “Gesprache mit Kafka. Aufzeichnungen und Erinnerungen” (S. Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, 1951). The book was reprinted many times. We have no 100% guarantee that those words were the exact Kafka’s words. According to the Janouch’s memoirs, Kafka said them discussing the book “Der Schwarze Vorhang: Roman Von Den Worten Und Zufallen” by Alfred Doblin.

Dear András,

may be, this Mr/Mrs Down-Voter doesn't exist? Anyone could click inadvertently and not notice. A single case is still not a regularity.

Actions are the seed of fate deeds grow into destiny.

--- Harry S Truman

Dear Callaway,

I understand, respect and support with all my forces the desire for precision and purity of scientific definitions. Thank you for your comment. It seems, I regret to be not able to inform Mr. Kafka or Mr. Janouch about your very interesting opinion :-). Esp. about the lexical metaphors with causal semantics. Or about the grammatical metonymies (they are natural for Ich-Wir-deixis in many languages, what to do?…) 

I'm not sure, that the requirements for scientific metalanguage are relevant for a quote from a memoir literature, but as a joke, it’s great! At my alma mater (like at some other universities) the students entertained themselves: using the special terms they commented a poetic verse from physical, genetic, geological, philosophical,.. etc points of view. It is possible to find out the very valuable facts. 

Dear @Olga, dear @András, it is not a single case. There were at least 15 downvotes on this thread. It is no coincidence in question, omission ...but intention definitely. Dear @Marg has got multiple downvotes! So more than 20% of all answers were downvoted!

 Interesting question by Ting Fa Margherita Chang and good discussion by RG followers. As usual -ve voting by some fellows who cannot express themself about their views. Alas!! Dear -ve voters tell us about yourself we happily listen your views too. Dear fellows who got down voting do not bother much, take it easy. When you develop the ability to listen the NEGATIVE comments without losing temper or confidence, it means you have become TRULY MATURED.

"You cannot change your future, but, you can change your habits, and surely your habits will change your future" Dr. APJ Kalam 11th President and missile man of India (http://www.abdulkalam.com/kalam/)

"I don't believe in taking right decisions. I take decision and make them right. So always believe in your ability and efforts" Ratan Tata (http://www.tata.com/aboutus/articlesinside/Ratan-N-Tata)

Believe in yourself

If you think you are beaten: you are

If you think you dare not: you don’t

If you would like to win but think you can’t

It’s almost cinch you won

If you think you will loose: you are lost

For out in the world we find success begins with a Fellow’s WILL

It’s all in the STATE of MIND.  Life’s battles don’t always go to the stronger or faster man. But sooner or later THE MAN who is the one who think HE CAN.

A successful man is one who can lay a firm foundation with the bricks that others throw at him.

Mainz, Germany

Dear Laguta,

Well, I don't see that you answered my question. You seem not to feel yourself under such an obligation? I though for sure you would have a quick and compelling reading of the text you quote.

In any case, I'm glad to know you found my question entertaining. 

Now, about "fate" and "circumstances," etc? After all, we're all in the same boat here, wondering about this matter.

H.G. Callaway

Dear All,

Fate vs/with Circumstances, Cases, etc... Well, on the one hand, I prefer their descriptions on the base of the software and computer game metaphors, though these are not “the freshest” for our days (I wrote about them in my book on metaphorology many years ago). May be, the game scenario “Life on the Earth” exists, and it was written by a brilliant Programmer (we can argue endlessly about His personality). The ending of the Game depends only partly on the players who have their free will, but the frames of their cognitive freedom and biological forms are also limited with the Program. So, I develop an old good Cartesian idea (slightly modernized). On the other hand, it’s the great error to identify our reality with the help of imaginative descriptions, however, can we describe smth without metaphors? I’m not sure. I liked Dr Callaway’s words about Popper, though I understand that the basic metaphors of the Popper's "three worlds” theory form a “conceptual mix”.

One story more for the Margherita’s collection. My family took a trip by car 20 years ago. Our car was full of hiking equipment, tents, inflatable boat, etc. That wonderful day we planned to drive about 800 km, therefore we moved very quickly. Other cars that surrounded us formed a group and moved with the same speed. Suddenly my husband noticed that smth was wrong with a wheel (he wasn’t sure), so we left our group and turned to a side road for stopping. He checked the wheels, our daughter played with our cat, and I... I don’t know why, but I was so angry that we stopped and had all the chances to break the ideal plan of our trip! Finally, we continued our way and after few miles saw that group of neighbors-cars in a very poor condition. There was a terrible accident, one car was even upside down and thrown on a field. Fortunately, people were alive, but if this group included our overloaded car... This case has totally changed my attitude to all plans, life schedules, spontaneous decisions of my family members, my desire to be "in a group", that is committed somewhere or to smth, and lots more. And I became more calm, free and happy!

Dear friends, I didn't find out nor a question neither an erotema in the Dr Callaway's message to me (one day ago). Does anyone see them there? Callaway only noticed that he doesn’t know the source of my quotation from Kafka. Dr Moraru was the first who payed attention to that quotation, so I wrote him about its source (please, see above, if it is interesting). My question: should our dear Dr. Callaway read the messages in the discussion? He seems not to feel himself under such an obligation? Dear Callaway, don't be offended by this mirror move.

Dear Olga,

Unfortunately, I have often met down-voters here.  Ignorance and evilness are unlimited especially under the mask of anonymity.   If only you were right…

I am sorry, I forgot the cowardice.

Dear Doko and Roland,

(Un)fortunately, I cannot change either my thinking or my acting. My categorical imperative is to be honest, to follow the right way. I cannot follow the mainstream utilitarian approach.   

Dear Olga,

Dear All,

Quod erat demonstrandum.

Dear All,

this Down-Voter may be a mentally sick person, or a banal trol, or even a censor computer program, or smth else. I haven't enough data for a final conclusion ( I was down-voted only once). Don't waste your emotional energy, simply gather these down-voted texts, and we will find out him/it/them sooner or later.

Dear Roland,

You have not understood me. You wrote: “And as for as I can say (reading always your posts, answers, comments) you don't have anything to alter.” I am a bit sad because you have not even approached my points. I am in a permanent activity (fight) for altering things and circumstances around me and inside me. However, I want to conserve the honesty and the ethical backgrounds I consider right.

Mainz, Germany

Dear Laguta,

Please excuse the oversight, if I missed something. But I was genuinely interested in the interpretation you might put on the Kafka. My question was by no means merely rhetorical.

More to the point, since you liked my argument from Popper, is to say, perhaps, that one need not endorse every argument or position from Popper to appreciate the one I gave. I think The Poverty of Historicism his best book. I made use of his argument in my first book, Context for Meaning and Analysis.

Later, I did a close study of R.W. Emerson's essay, "Fate" (1860) from his book of that year The Conduct of Life. See my Introduction to the volume, svp:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264161899_Ralph_Waldo_Emerson_The_Conduct_of_Life_A_Philosophical_Reading

I think that the lessons there might be applied in understand "fateful" stories, such as the one you tell about your road trip and being saved from the accident.

The general idea is that "fate" or "Providence," or whatever it might be called, works by application of means to apparent ends. For instance, you were saved from the accident by stopping to attend to the wheel. If this is indeed "fate" or "Providence," then the problem with the wheel appeared, in order to prevent worse harm --or something to that effect.

But if "fate" or "Providence" must work by application of means to ends, then this shows limitation of power, let us say, subservience to law-like regularity. To align ourselves with such laws of the world, might be looked upon as a matter of "conspiring with fate," as the ancient Persian poets often put it. But, to do so, we have to know what the laws or regularities of the world might be. In consequence, Emerson holds that it is "thought which makes us free," since once we understand the laws or regularities of the world, we can make use of them for our own ends or purposes. We become able to do things we could not do before. In a sense, this is to reiterate a thesis of Bacon: "Knowledge is power," though Emerson's conception of "power" is really more like our conception of "virtue" or "excellence": a kind of humanistic power to change the world (in some degree or other) partly by understanding it. Any "fate" which can be overcome, is no longer an irresistible fate.

Whatever the limitations placed upon us by the world, then (and, of course, they can never be completely eliminated, only ameliorated or partly lifted), we may attain to new power over them by understanding the basis of limitation in law and regularity. So, for example, knowing of the accident of your friends, you may now be less inclined to travel cross country with groups or cars, or at higher speeds, perhaps.  A truly fatalistic attitude, however, passively avoids precaution. 

Kind regards,

H.G. Callaway

Book Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Conduct of Life, A Philosophical Reading.

Dear All,

I suggest you to read the essay of H.G. Callaway (Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Conduct of Life, A Philosophical Reading). This paper suits fine the present thread.

Some excerpts of it to take a delight in.

“Similarly, regarding our America today, we might say that all its power and might, military, economic, and cultural, will not and cannot prevent the untoward and unhappy workings of our own growing social and economic inequalities. The threat implicit in this places limits on what we may do. We may of course evade the point for a time, but the workings of growing inequalities are ultimately quite sure. The consequences or effects of what we now do are already included in our present acts, which are indeed causes. There can be little doubt of what we typically neglect, if, too intensively, we pursue our own special talent and power of economic expansion. In consequence, then, there is, plausibly, even less room for doubt on the proper direction of our deeper and fuller success.”

Mainz, Germany

Dear Bozsik,

Many thanks for your recommendation and your kind words.

H.G. Callaway

Dear Callaway, 

thank you for your comment. I have to think about it. Deep in the man sits fast his Program..? I didn't read the Emerson's essay, only his poem. So l'lI put it and your works into my list for reading, finish my research fieldwork (I'm far from Taipei now), read everything, think and come back to our discussion. "A truly fatalistic attitude", as you say, is a smth like "game over" in my worldview. Have good days in summer Mainz!

Mainz, Germany

Dear Laguta,

I recall once traveling cross country in Africa --on a small bus-transporter going from one city to another (this was back in the early 1980's) , and noticing piles of wrecked vehicles on either side of the road, at the top of each hill; moreover, the driver had the disturbing habit of passing on the hills, without being able to see if there was on-coming traffic.

After a goodly exercise of patience, I finally leaned over and said to the driver, "Don't you think it would be safer not to pass on the hills? You can't see who is coming the other way." His reply was in words to the effect: "You shouldn't say that, because God may hear you and think you want something bad to happen." He was intent on trusting in fate; and to take precautions was regarded as disrespectful. 

When we jump on the bandwagon of the "next big thing," whatever it may be, and refuse any critical public attention to possible untoward effects in the exaggeration of the trend, this seems somewhat similar. "Jump on the roller-coaster, and see where it takes you!" 

H.G. Callaway

Mainz, Germany

Dear Stoica,

Thanks for your comment. I should say, perhaps, that I am inclined to give  Emerson a quite naturalistic reading, or, though he resists it, I suggests that his later work is open to a more naturalistic reading. From that perspective, and understanding his place within American intellectual history, I see him as offering a kind of analysis of the ancient theme of "fate."  Knowledge breaks down the mass of uncomprehended "fate" into details of law and circumstances --into something that can be understood and which offers greater potentialities for action and control of one's own life and of events. On the basis of a knowledge of natural law and initial conditions of systems, after all, science predicts the future all the time--as, say, with the course of the probe recently sent to the outer solar system. Nothing mystical there.

Regarding social and political events, in contrast, such precision is not to be expected. But on the other hand, I don't think that this requires us to bring in anything "mystical." On the contrary, I argued explicitly against Eddington's appeal to things "mystical" in my interpretation of his book, The Nature of the Physical World. See:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278673181_Introduction_A.S._Eddington_Physics_and_Philosophy

This is the full Introduction I wrote to my new edition:

http://www.amazon.com/Arthur-Eddington-Nature-Physical-World/dp/1443863866

I've been consistently in opposition, on this thread, to any "mystical" approach to the ancient theme of "fate," "fortuna, "destiny," etc. Of course, we do all depend on others in what we do, even unknown others. But even here, we have the option of deciding with which others we want to associate. Freedom of (dis)association is a key element of any workable conception of freedom. 

H.G. Callaway

Chapter Introduction: A.S. Eddington, Physics and Philosophy

Thanks all for the perfect answers

A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.

--- Winston Churchill

it is true that our life is a resultant effect of our choices.Our live cummulative effect  is a result of choices we make as life in its entirety is not defined by physical substances alone.When we make the right choice it will definitely influence our  lives by the on,inactions,mindset,opinions,feelings,and attitude.A situation(cause) is defined by how we feel it (effects).What is so bad to one may be viewed as just a learning process or a trial of faith to another.God is the author of fate,but man is a partner in designer of faith-destiny. We chart the course of our lives factored by environment,learning experiences,family background and sometimes personal orientation.We did not choose where to be born,but we can choose where to grow or develop from an.d who we want to be.God helps us to choose but will not force us to decide on what to choose-thats fate.As soon as we reach the age of reasoning,we can chart our lives the way we want. We were destined to be happy,good,great,rich,wealthy  and all that,God has put into the universe all that we need to reach our destiny but to get to that destiny is a road called CHOICES and a school called EXPERIENCE.

Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds.

--- Franklin D. Roosevelt

My small submission to the discussion is the belief that i have taken from religion i follow. 

It is 49 : 51 ratio of fate and actions. If the actions are true and correct then they take you to the path chosen. The 49 is the environmental factors. Surroundings. People. Nature. Situations.

as a follower of the faith i do believe in fate. 

I strongly feel and advocate that correctness of choices is the key. The surroundings would have an impact on the thought process. And if the choices that we make are right the end of the journey would be good.

On a personal level. Ii have had many instances which have changed the course of life. from near fatal situations of body harm to other more psychological to career related.

A personal experience to share would be the choice that i had to make to start a career in industry early in life, when actually i wanted to continue the studies. But the situation did present me an option to complete the unfinished part and i chose to go by that. 

The experiences have left a learning for me.

That's right.

If fate means you to lose, give him a good fight anyhow.

--- William McFee

Quite agree with quote of William Mc Fee dear Subhash