Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Fate VS. Free Will
yoga for holistic development essay
yoga for holistic development essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Fate VS. Free Will
Friends when we talk about astrology, we mess up in rajyogas, duryogas, auspicious incidents, inauspicious happenings and so on. I don't think we ever proceed to search out 'seriously' beyond that. Then comes out the most controversial and debated subject what we call 'free will'. If everything has been pre-destined, what the hell we are striving for? Is there any devil writing our fates all the time and having fun? A big No, all the saints say that nobody else, but we alone are responsible for our plight. Vivekananda says "Stand upon your feet and take the responsibility of your present prevailing circumstances instead of being a coward escapist passing all the blames upon Almighty."
Our Seers were not mere astrologers or fortune tellers, but they were inventors. Without the help of any external aid they located so much just by going deep inside. They located the laws of nature and their influence upon human beings. If we just make a go with different yogas, then astrology seems to be mere fatalism unable to extend any aid to come out of the vicious circle what we term as destiny. In this case astrology seems to have lost its ground. The predestination of fate leaves astrology meaningless. Simply because the past has already passed, the present has been decided and the future has already been written.
I started astrology in the year 1998. Till the end of 2003 I was an incurable fatalist. During these 5 years I read almost all the literature of Vivekananda and Yogananda, the famous kriya yogi who left his human body in the year 1950. In those books I read a lot about the so called free will of human beings but with little conviction. Since as an Astrologer I was witnessing almost regularly that destiny couldn’t be altered. But the last two years changed my whole perception. I understood well what those great saints meant to say. When they talked about the free will, they were not concerned merely about the human body made of five tatvas of Nature namely water, air, earth, fire and ether. In all actuality they were talking about the free will of the spirit, which inhabits one and all. The body and mind are bounded in the Nature's laws, and therefore, enjoy very little freedom. When you go by the commands of mind, you gradually nullify yourself by being the slave of senses.
The view of free will has been heavily debated in the field of philosophy. Whether humans possess free will or rather life is determined. With the aid of James Rachels ' article, The Debate over Free Will, it is clearly revealed that human lives are "both determined and free at the same time" (p.482, Rachels), thus, in line with the ideas of compatibilist responses. Human 's actions are based on certain situations that are causally determined by unexpected events, forced occurrence, and certain cases that causes one to outweigh the laws of cause and effect. The article also showcases instances where free will does exist. When human actions are being based on one 's emotions of the situation, desire, and simply that humans are creatures that are created to have intellectual reasoning. I argue, that Rachels’ article, provides helpful evidence on compatibilists responses that demonstrate free will and determinism actions come into play with each other.
The argument of whether humans are pre-determined to turn out how we are and act the way we do or if we are our own decision makers and have the freedom to choose our paths in life is a long-standing controversy. As a psychologist in training and based on my personal beliefs, I do not believe that we truly have this so called free will. It is because of this that I choose to believe that the work of free will by d’Holbach is the most accurate. Although the ideas that Hume and Chisolm present are each strong in their own manner, d’Holbach presents the best and most realistic argument as to how we choose our path; because every event has a cause, we cannot have free will. Not only this, but also, that since there is always an external cause, we can never justify blame. Now let’s review Hume and Chisolm’s arguments and point out why I do not think that they justly describe free will.
Choices that people make have a giant place in their lives. Most of us consider that we do these choices freely, that we have free will to make these choices. The point that most of us miss is free will is not simple as is it looks like. When one makes choices doesn’t he consider that what would that choices lead him to? Therefore does he make those choices for his benefits or his desires to make those choices? Does the environment push him to make those choices or does he have the free will to ignore his own environment? Philosopher and writes splits around those questions. There is different thesis, beliefs about free will. Some say that we are conditioned from birth with qualities of our personality, social standing and attitudes. That we do not have free will, our choices shapes up by the world we born in to. Some others believe that we born as a blank paper we could shape by the occasions or choices that we make freely. Marry Midgley on her article “Freedom and Heredity” defends that without certain limitations for instance our talents, capacities, natural feelings we would not need to use free will. Those limitations lead us to use free will and make choices freely. She continues without our limitations we do not need to use free will. Free will needs to be used according to our needs but when mentioning need not as our moral need as our needs to what could we bring up with our capacities. We need to use our free will without stereotypes. Furthermore free will should be shaped by the choice that would lead us good consequences.
It has been sincerely obvious that our own experience of some source that we do leads in result of our own free choices. For example, we probably believe that we freely chose to do the tasks and thoughts that come to us making us doing the task. However, we may start to wonder if our choices that we chose are actually free. As we read further into the Fifty Readings in Philosophy by Donald C. Abel, all the readers would argue about the thought of free will. The first reading “The System of Human Freedom” by Baron D’Holbach, Holbach argues that “human being are wholly physical entities and therefore wholly subject to the law of nature. We have a will, but our will is not free because it necessarily seeks our well-being and self-preservation.” For example, if was extremely thirsty and came upon a fountain of water but you knew that the water was poisonous. If I refrain from drinking the water, that is because of the strength of my desire to avoid drinking the poisonous water. If I was too drink the water, it was because I presented my desire of the water by having the water overpowering me for overseeing the poison within the water. Whether I drink or refrain from the water, my action are the reason of the out coming and effect of the motion I take next. Holbach concludes that every human action that is take like everything occurring in nature, “is necessary consequences of cause, visible or concealed, that are forced to act according to their proper nature.” (pg. 269)
The idea of free will can be traced to religion and destiny or Nietzsche’s idea of “free will” . ”All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else.” (Buddha) I disagree with
Determinism and free will are incompatible. The events in people’s lives are already chosen for us, or determined. The expected behaviors of people are explained by natural laws and by experiences that they were exposed to. But this viewpoint does not explain people’s intuition. Although, there is a chain of physical causes that lead into people’s intuition.
Fate seems to defy humanity at every turn. A man may have his life planned out to the last second, but then some random force intervenes and he dies the second after he has completed his life plan. Some believe in fate, believing that our lives are predetermined from the moment we are born. Other people believe that everything is random, the result of some god rolling the dice in a universal poker game. Still other people believe that each and every person is in total control of his or her destiny, every step of the way. Who is to say which viewpoint is false? Every culture has a unique perception of the role of fate in our lives, and no group has the "right answer," simply a different answer. Taking into consideration the views of other cultures can help an individual refine his personal viewpoint on this inconceivable subject.
In summary, the idea of self-reliance will continue to bewilder the minds of our current and future generations. In fact, this is due to the lack of a definite answer to the question. Nevertheless, I am persuaded that whether an individual be a believer or non-believer in having control of their destiny, there are forces or uncontrollable factors in life that have the ability to control a minute percentage of one’s destiny.
Fate is non-existent as one's future is based upon their own personal decisions. It is believing
Compatibilism is the belief that determinism and free will are companionable philosophies. The question that is posed is; is it possible to believe in both ideas without being rationally erratic? Is there such thing as controlling every aspect of our life and choosing what we do and how we do it? Or is it previous events that have happened in our lives that cause everything that happens? It has been argued back and fourth for centuries, if free will and determinism are compatible and it will continue for many more. Throughout this essay, it will be argued that compatibilism cannot be defended, with use of sufficient evidence and support from research conducted on this topic. Free will is supported and determinism is not supported, which will
In order to better understand this relationship between free will and cosmic order we need to take a close look at the myth. According to Nagle, in the ancient world, fate and destiny held a crucial role in the lives of human beings. Every aspect of living was touched and influenced by the Gods who manifested themselves in a number of ways (Nagle 100). The greek word for fate “anake” (necessity), epitomises the fatalistic belief that the universe and everything in it is governed by unforeseeable forces.
Freedom, or the concept of free will seems to be an elusive theory, yet many of us believe in it implicitly. On the opposite end of the spectrum of philosophical theories regarding freedom is determinism, which poses a direct threat to human free will. If outside forces of which I have no control over influence everything I do throughout my life, I cannot say I am a free agent and the author of my own actions. Since I have neither the power to change the laws of nature, nor to change the past, I am unable to attribute freedom of choice to myself. However, understanding the meaning of free will is necessary in order to decide whether or not it exists (Orloff, 2002).
Astrology has had its ups and downs through history, but it always maintained that station of being. (www.astrologers.com/history.html# Relevant, p.1) After some aspects of religion became prevalent, astrology became known as the “work of the devil”. (Weblinker.com Enterprises, p.1) During the Renaissance, though, astrology became more liked than before. (Weblinkers.com Enterprises, p.1) Even religious leaders began to practice astrology more often. (Weblinkers.com Enterprises, p.1) People of the royal families had their own astrologers. (Weblinkers.com Enterprises, p.1) That is how worldwide astrology was. (Weblinkers.com Enterprises, p.1)
Nature is complicated. It includes many different sorts of things and one of these is human beings. Such beings exhibit one unique yet natural attribute that others things apparently do not—that is free will.