Do you believe in fate?

>>9797335
The written in the starts kind? No.

The "your prior judgments and mistakes, successes and failures, wants and needs and interactions with other have affected who you are today and will affect who you are tomorrow"?

Sure

who else am i supposed to blame for my various failings?

Fate and temperament are the same thing

t. Novalis (paraphrased)

>>9797343
the jews of course, or capitalists if you're the cucked sort

>>9797346
chance encounters, coincidences

>>9797338
>The written in the starts kind?
guardian angel

File: s.jpg (35KB, 466x349px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 466x349px

Do you know that story about Tarkovsky talking to the dead Pasternak

File: Robot on fire.png (954KB, 1355x737px) Image search: [Google]

954KB, 1355x737px

Compatibilism rings true to me

>>9797346
Except this is taken from Heraclitus: Fate is character.

File: 1467935709994-2.png (2MB, 1205x1600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1205x1600px

It is a scientific fact that fate does not exist.
If you were to rewind the Universe by a few billion years and then let time run again, things would turn out kinda like the same initially, but as God's clock runs, things would gradually become more and more different. This is because the fundamental nature of this Universe runs on probabilities, odds, chances, just like with the dice in your picture. In a grand scale, things become predictable. Think of it like throwing a quadrillion dice, you'd normally expect that each of the 6 possible results would be evenly distributed, so 1/6 of all for every possible result. When you have smaller systems with higher electrical density, like the human brain, there are less dice to throw and more possible results, so, no, there isn't fate.
Though that's not to say free will exists.
Ignore each and every other answer, this is the only truth to the subject.

>>9797489
Please explain compatibilism to me. I can't for the life of me understand how anything other than full free will or pure determinism could be true.

>>9797560
scientific facts are in flux

>>9797560
Can you chill out with the scientific terminology for a second? We're trying to have a pseudo-intellectual discussion here.

>>9797576
Idiot.

>>9797561
"Soft determinism"
It's natural and balanced

I'm no philosophy student. This video will do a better job of it than I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KETTtiprINU&t=330s

File: S4E4Universe.png (414KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 640x480px

>>9797560
>If you were to rewind the Universe by a few billion years
this is scientifically impossible, mr. scientific facts

>>9797604
It isn't because there isn't a God clock as I said, but I used that term because I doubt /lit/ has any understanding of special & general relativity.

>>9797591
Oh gosh butters even posts crash course videos. Makes sense given the sort of person she is.

>>9797610
FTLT the entire Universe.

File: 1460730982464.png (14KB, 149x146px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 149x146px

>>9797617
Nice try but tachyons don't exist and you can't move particles/fields that don't occupy space.

>>9797616
>the sort of person she is.
>Not a philosophy student.
What more about compatibilism does one need to know? I don't have a test this week.

>>9797335
Metaphysical fatalism is true, so yes. I imagine it is a substance of some kind, an eternal actuality not unlike the prime mover.

>>9797560
Cool it with the pseud shit. No physical theory has demonstrated the universe to be random

>>9797652
When did I said it was random? I said it was a matter of probabilities. No but really, I love when humanities people try to discuss scientific concepts. You have no idea how stupid and embarrassing it is.

Only in the sense that people can't change who they inherently are.

>>9797662
the universe is made out of poetry, not atoms, my dear.

>>9797662
Odds/chances/probability/dice metaphors = random. Not a student of the science of accidents I take it?

File: einstein.jpg (68KB, 640x801px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x801px

>>9797335
god.. easy on the dice

>>9797673
(((Einstein)))... easy on the Jewry

if fate is real, then it's fate of some people to be brutally raped, murdered and cyberbullied.

BUT maybe fate only manifests itself on certain special occasions, maybe someone intervenes from above.

File: 1485654179077-2.jpg (40KB, 483x430px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 483x430px

>>9797671
Not it isn't you fucking retard. Randomness is not governed by any laws. Probability is. You know when I said it's embarrassing/funny to watch idiots talking about scientific terms? When you intervene it becomes annoying.

>>9797560
are those turds

>>9797692
dude... easy on the science

>>9797692
This is certainly contingent upon which aspects of probability you are discussing and in what context you are using it in. Your simple minded usage is reductionistic and flat out wrong. Probability isn't even a well defined notion conceptually. Do you mean to say that the inner dynamics of a probabilistic universe is in fact governed by laws? Not to the extent that probability is a function of irreducible randomness. If one talks in terms of degrees of belief, that may be different

>>9797724
Sure thing then. I'm not going to waste my time explaining why and how randomness is different from probability. Stay in this mental bubble you created for yourself.

>>9797768
>i don't know what im talking about so im going to stop talking

lol