The question of free will--the idea that we are free to make decisions unhindered by external forces--is very disconcerting to deal with because most people are not willing to accept that we are not in control of our lives. It is also controversial because it wrestles with the idea of a world possibly without moral responsibility. If there is no free will how do we hold a person responsible for molesting someone or for stealing? If someone actually didn't decide to do either of those things but rather was just going through the motions then it doesn't seem right to hold them culpable. Consider the concept of free will in the example of walking on the street and find a wallet with $200 inside of it. Do you sent it back to the …show more content…
A common argument is that any final choice we make is simply a feeling inside of us that makes the conclusion on whether to take the wallet or not. The external and internal factors may lean us toward a decision but ultimately we have the last say. Yet, still questions arise to this such as why do we make this final decision if not from these factors? Where did these morals or whatever the case may be come from? It is difficult to argue for the concept of fate or determinism and say this was all planned out from the beginning of time knowing some things in nature happen randomly-- meaning given the same circumstances two opposite results can and often do happen (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle). One factor of thisprinciple is illustrated with the example that if you throw a ball against a wall it will bounce off in the same direction each time. However, if you take an atom and throw it off a wall there are endless directions it ricochets when repeated. If one argues that a decision they made came from nowhere, nothing affected a man/woman to have them and are completely random, then they are not one's choices at all--just a roll of the dice which the person has no control over. The same problem arises if the argument comes up that either our decisions or personalities come from God. The first problem would be proving the existence of God. The second and more prevailing argument is that even if it is found our attributes
and/or
Free will and fate are both prominent in the Odyssey. In the Odyssey, free will is depicted whenever characters make decisions. In example, Odysseus blinds the Cyclops, Polyphemus. Fate, in the Odyssey, is the consequences that are dealt out due to certain actions. In the case of Odysseus and Polyphemus, the consequence is that when Odysseus is on a ship heading home to reach Ithaca, Poseidon, being the father of Polyphemus, sends a storm at Odysseus being angry that Odysseus blinded his son. In that scenario, Odysseus makes the decision to blind Polyphemus to escape, and in turn, the consequence is that Poseidon attempts to hit him with a storm in the sea. The contrasting themes of
Fate and free will in the Matrix, fate is non-negotiable as the world is preprogramed. Human actions are predetermined so free will does not exist. When Morpheus offers neo the choice to follow him down the ‘rabbit hole’ or ‘stay in wonderland’ he is offering him the choice between fate and free will. In the scene where Neo first meets the Oracle, there is the possibility of learning what his fate is and his identity. In the final scene, Trinity reveals that she is not afraid to accept her fate in loving Neo; the filmmaker draws attention to the importance of the decision-making, which is at the heart of the fate and free will dichotomy.
Throughout the play A Midsummer Night's Dream, Shakespeare uses both fate and free will to present his philosophy towards the nature of love. The characters struggle through confusion and conflicts to be with the one they love. Although the course of their love did not go well, love ultimately triumphs over all at the end of the play. The chaos reaches a climax causing great disruption among the lovers. However, the turmoil is eventually resolved by Puck, who fixes his mistake. The confusion then ends and the lovers are with their true love. Throughout the play Shakespeare's philosophy was displayed in various scenes, and his concept still holds true in modern society.
Destiny is no matter of chance. It’s a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved,” quoted by William Jennings Bryan. One of the most debated questions in history is whether our lives are ruled by fate or by own choice. William Shakespeare brings this question into play in his production Romeo and Juliet. Although fate does seam to be ruling over every situation, I believe that choice has more to do with this story then it’s really credited to. Even in the opening lines, this play drills into your head the inevitable outcome of the two lover’s deaths. When the chorus uses the phrase Star crossed lovers (I, 1,6) it clearly shows William Shakespeare’s thoughts on what killed Romeo and Juliet. This
In the texts, A Raisin in the Sun and Antigone, written by Lorraine Hansberry and Sophocles, respectively, the lens of Fate vs. Free Will is exposed within the situations and dialogues in these plays. However, to analyze these plays with this lens perspective, one must first recognize what this lens pertains to. The lens of Fate vs. Free Will pertains to the perspective of analyzing events in a story and deciding whether they occur due to a predetermined destiny, or rather, a choice made by a character’s own decision or free will. Some may argue, that no matter what, events happen only out of one of these choices. Now in some opinions, that may hold some validity.
I have always believed that everything happens for a reason. Now, I am not saying that I believe that there is a larger plan for everyone’s life. To clarify, I believe that there is no such thing as fate. Alternatively the events that happen throughout an individual 's life impacts their future in unknown ways.
Oedipus the King, was written by Sophocles between C.A.496-406B.C. In this play, Oedipus is a great example of Sophocles’ belief that fate will control a man’s life no matter how much free will exists.
A different approach to this question is that our life’s destiny is predetermined for us, but based on the
Fate vs. Free will in Julius Caesar The conflict over fate versus free will is a big conversation that can be argued both ways. Do we let our fate lead the path in our life, or do we take matters into our own hands and find a way to avoid it? If we do avoid our fate, what are the consequences and how do we handle them? The role that consequences play is that people will fully commit to his/her fate in order to avoid the consequences.
Sophocles shows throughout the play, Oedipus the King, that fate triumphs over free will. This is presented by situational irony, the blind seer, and pathos. The following are examples that show this idea through the three literary terms mentioned. Situational irony plays a big role in how Sophocles displays fate in the play. An example of situational irony representing fate is when Oedipus promises to get rid of whoever murdered King Laius, but it was actually Oedipus himself who was the murderer.
Generally, fate refers to the development of events beyond a person’s control (Aurobindo). As such, a fatalist is a person who believes that whatever happens is, and always was, unavoidable. Moreover, such a person strongly believes that he or she has no control over what happens the next moment, tomorrow, next year, or several years to come. Free will, on the other hand, is formed by the power of sanction (Aurobindo). In other words, it is consent by the spirit that it shall not be bound but that its enjoyment should be bound by time, space, and causality and by the swabhava and the dharma (Aurobindo). To determine whether fate or free will controls human lives, it is important to objectively analyse, synthesizes, and respond to the “critical conversation” that the authors of class readings seem to be engaging with regard to this subject. In connection to this, humanity has been fascinated by fate and free will for a long time. Some philosophers in the Ancient Greek and the Middle Ages believed that free will influenced human destiny while others believed that fate was responsible for what befell mankind.
In Oedipus the King, one of Sophocles’ most popular plays, Sophocles clearly depicts the Greek’s popular belief that fate will control a man’s life despite of man’s free will. Man was free to choose and was ultimately held responsible for his own actions. Throughout Oedipus the King, the concept of fate and free will plays an integral part in Oedipus' destruction.
In William Shakespeare’s play, Julius Caesar, two interesting forces, fate and free will, are shown competing for prominence over the other. Fate was exemplified in the many prophecies and omens the characters viewed throughout the play. Free will was the characters abilities to overcome and defeat their fate. Many characters have struggles with the power of their free will overcoming their fate, namely Caesar, Cassius, and Brutus. Although in the end all three of those characters succumb to their fate, Shakespeare shows that there is a delicate equilibrium between the two forces.
The idea about free will and fate is still unsolved and debatable throughout the world. Some claim that humans have their own power to create their own destiny, however, others argue that they are inescapable victims of fate. The novel, Things Fall Apart, portrays the relationship between human’s determination to succeed and his or her own fate by describing Okonkwo as a tragic figure. While Okonkwo believes that he can overcome his fate through his hard work, Chinua Achebe reveals that fate is a powerful, inevitable event in the novel.
Predestination, in the dictionary, is said to be "the doctrine that God in consequence of his foreknowledge of all events infallibly guides those who are destined for salvation." Scripture has 2 very good passages for defining what predestination is: Jeremiah 1:5 which says "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." God is talking about Jeremiah in this passage and how God chose him before time; he was predestined for his job. Romans 8:28-30 "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed