Fate vs. free will

[Passacaglia]

It doesn't fit though. Because God is the greatest good he can't act in a disinterested way. Everything he does is for his own glorification. Even the sacrifice of Christ glorifies God.

Not sure what to make of all this. It looks like you're saying that your God is empathetic?

I'm explaining things from a protestant orthodox position

Christ isn't a proxy. He is God.

I'm aware of the Christ paradox and the mystery of the Trinity; 'proxy' was just a convenient word for expressing my thoughts. Which in other words is: an omnipotent and omniscient god doesn't need to create/send a son/god to Earth to do anything he wants done. (See? Much wordier without 'proxy.') Your God could simply snap his fingers, so to speak, and accomplish anything he wants, no? Including making us all obedient believers, curing all disease, removing hunger, and going back in time to fix all of these inconsistencies before they began. Thus, I'm confused what Christ has to do with the question of his father's altruism or goodness.

I don't think so because I think godliness extends beyond goodness. Off the top of my head I would just say that goodness is God's character and any goodness in humanity reflects that character.

Hm, okay, so God is good because he's God, and human goodness is our degree of similarity to God. (i.e., god-ness) Sounds a lot like Augustine's answer to the Problem of Evil!

It's a paradox.

But I'm not bothered by it because he's still just. What's amazing is that he withholds his justice, is patient, and extends his mercy and grace throughout the world.

Well, good on you, I suppose. I can't believe in any paradoxical deity without proof; and if I did somehow see proof, I couldn't ever sincerely respect a deity who's done the things that Abraham's god has done. (And not done.)

 

[sprinkles]

 

[sprinkles]

Also paradoxically free will cannot be found by people who only abide by reason. How can we talk about will among people who never avail themselves of the further reaches of human ability?

Of course one who has never really used freedom will not see it or know what it is because they're too busy following rules and expectations.

 

[Stek]

Buddha did not believe in fate, which is synonymous with luck. Only cause and effect.

Isn't "effect" essentially "fate"? As in, the ultimate state of your life will be the consequence of your life up until that moment?

 

[sprinkles]

Isn't "effect" essentially "fate"? As in, the ultimate state of your life will be the consequence of your life up until that moment?

No. Fate is generally considered to be an external force to normal cause and effect. With fate the results are determined before any cause has a chance to happen and causes are merely incidental.

Cause and effect is like one domino falling simply because the previous one hit it, and nothing more than that - there's no overarching predetermined fate, it's just physics. But with fate the domino doesn't fall because it was hit, it falls because it was predetermined to do so by mysterious external factors and the fact that the previous domino hit it is only incidental.

Edit:
Also this is an important distinction because with simple cause and effect, there is nothing against an agent intervening and changing the course, e.g. you might decide to block one domino from hitting the next. With fate you supposedly can't do that - if the domino is meant to fall, it will fall no matter what you do because everything up to that point has been conspired to make it so.

 

[Obsidius]

I know this is probably annoying but it doesn't matter, how are you defining free will and fate respectively? This is of crucial importance as the nature of a contradiction lies in the definition, and as such certain definitions will contradict, especially in this case. If we're talking free will as in the complete agency over one's life, and fate as some exterior or ultimate agency over our lives, then they, of course, contradict. However, it doesn't matter, I've always thought that our lives are pre-determined, but it's possible to still believe in some sort of "relative" free-will; that is to say that: we cannot be aware of any particular "fate", we are only aware of the past and present and therefore our future is unknown. This means that to us, there is free will, because we are not aware of any fate and because we believe we are making choices, therefore, effectively, we are.

 

[Passacaglia]

Maybe only some people. And maybe some of us are like gods and the rest of you are boring.

This made me lol.

Some people are born and/or raised to have more free will than others, while others are almost drones; but I wouldn't equate the drones with determinism.

 

[Riva]

Buddha did not believe in fate, which is synonymous with luck. Only cause and effect.

Yeah i actually elaborated on it here -

According to buddhism there are 4 or 5 aspects (can't remember) that influences (i am using the word influenze NOT govern) a person's life:

A) karma - consequences of one's actions in this life and previous
B) parental attributes - looks etc which you inherit from parents
C) nature/weather - rain, earthquakes, tsunamis etc
D) thoughts - this aspect is controllable by the person

And buddhism also says no matter what aspects you get (A B and C) one can change one's life for the better or worse through perseverence (one's thoughts/will/ point D). D is equal to free will.

So in the end free will can change everything in your life for the better or worse.

 

[Zangetshumody]

Moving from the original post:

What does "predetermined" even mean?

Does it mean that something is already determined behind what might actually be determined?

As such a question can be answered by an act of free will, such a definition of "predetermination" could allow it to co-exist along with freewill, but only a very peculiar type of free will which I don't think has been laid out in this thread. Freewill is only possible when you are acting as the son of true (philosophical) authority, when you have full control over choosing your own actions and emotions, which supports a perpetual reconciliation for the self in any external trouble.