In a universe possibly created by accident/chance, how possible is it that each human's life is predetermined?

My thought is that Life is an absolute crapshoot. We do what we do and then deal with whatever that deals us.

Apart from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Physics.

While my logical mind agrees with @Adirondackwannabe that it’s all random, there’s always that inner voice constantly reminding me that as infintismal beings in a unimaginably vast and complex universe, we can never know one way or the other, for there is and always will be both too much we can’t know and too much we can never know we don’t know.

@Pachyderm_In_The_Room I knew that you wre going to say that.

It is all chance. No being, no matter how godly and all powerful, could possibly have the power to micro-manage every person’s life in every way, and ensure that it interlinks with every other person’s life.

If there is such an all-powerful being do that, it is a tremendous waste of that being’s capabilities.

When I was studying Buddhism, I was actually very comforted by the ‘fate’ aspect that life was predetermined so our true choices were limited. I’m not sure I fully believe our choices make no difference, but the fact that they were ‘factored in’ by your Deity or Fate, is interesting to me. A lot of my Vietnamese friends find great comfort in it.

It is chance, circumstance, and choice. No one thing predetermines the course of a life.

Wouldn’t the idea that everything is preordained render the idea of stupidity irrelevant? If someone does something incredibly dumb and get’s them or someone else killed, then would they still be responsible for their acts? Just an off the wall wacked thought that popped into my head.

I think our lives unfold like the digits of pi, predetermined and random at the same time.

Nothing may be planned or predetermined without a mechanism to plan or predetermine the thing upon. The mechanism for planning and predetermining a thing is code.

So it’s very simple. Find a code which details a thing before it existed, and call that thing planned or predetermined. But if no code is found to support the existence of a thing, then no one can claim it as definitely determined or random. Without a code, it could be either or. With a code, it must be determined.

The Pyramids, for instance… No code has ever been found which details their existence before they existed. We cannot therefor, logically claim that the pyramids were planned or predetermined. We can deduce an argument that they were created. But without a code, there is no basis for claiming it as truth.

I know this sounds crazy because it seems so obvious that the pyramids must have been planned… just like Paley’s watch. The shape, the tools, the apparent purpose… all lead to deductive logic being used to claim they were planned ahead of time rather than just appearing through a random act of chaos. But we cannot confuse the inscriptions within the pyramids with a coded plan which predetermined them. The inscriptions within the pyramids don’t tell us how they were built any more than cave art inscriptions explains how a cave is planned or predetermined.

But when we do find a code, then we must follow the same logic and rightfully claim predetermination. Knowing the author is irrelevant. We must induce the existence of an author wherever a code is found.

Your genetic code predetermines your eye color, your race, your gender, and much more. It is a six billion letter plan to build a unique individual. Surely claiming that could occur by chance of chaos would also require us to claim the pyramids were an accident too.

It’s all down to community chest.

It is all chance, except for those parts of your life that are controlled or predetermined by other humans. For example, a child raised by parents who are both doctors might be encouraged (or forced) to also become a doctor.

none at all.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies But what predetermined what predetermined your genetic code? And so on.

@rojo “And so on…”

Questions of infinity should not be asked if one cannot accept infinite answers.

The question of original creation is all too often asked in an unfair manner. The question is asked outside the box. But the answer must come from inside the box. Not cool to insist that everything must have a beginning and end when asking questions about the infinite. The question itself demands that we consider otherwise.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies but isn’t your starting point rather arbitrary?

What starting point shall suit the infinite?