jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (18 posts)

Is it luck or is it divine intervention?

  1. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    The assignation that you are one lucky, or unlucky, bastard comes from the assailable notion that you, to the extent that other operative forces allow you no time and space for action or inaction, do not have complete control over your life. In turn, this notion proceeds from the idea that Albert Einstein himself once propounded when he said: "God does not play dice with the universe." I will agree with what Einstein is proposing if he applies it solely to the function of the known and (yet) unknown physical forces that rule the wider universe. I believe that one can not truly  apply this "divine intervention theory" even in its strictest form to the human mind. Free will as it exist purposely in the realm of human interaction, can only be free, if the human brain that assuage its manifestation is not subjected to structural and functional anomalies that can wreak havoc on how it ultimately expresses free will.

    1. 0
      crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You might enjoy a piece I wrote on the Illusion of Choice that is being published in October on Existential.com

      Lame plug, I know tongue

      On topic, it is my belief that luck does not exist, and is a psychological ploy of the human mind to attribute that which we do not understand first to something supernatural.  It is the tactic used by the most insecure - "I'm not good enough so when things work out it must be luck."  Psychologically speaking this is called a "learned-helplessness attribution".

      It is also my belief that divine intervention is hokum.  A personal God was created by man for the same reasons luck was.

    2. Beelzedad profile image59
      Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Not quite. In a letter to Max Born, Einstein was commenting on his reluctance to accept Quantum field theory, he said:

      "Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the 'old one'. I, at any rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice."

      1. A.Villarasa profile image79
        A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for the correction. By the way, what did you think of the ideas that came out of my conversation with crmhaske

    3. schoolgirlforreal profile image76
      schoolgirlforrealposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  2. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    sorry about that .. didn't mean to double dip.

  3. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    As luck would have it, I won a few hundred dollars in the local casino last night. I am a fairly  experienced  black-jack player but sometimes, as unluck would have it, I inexplicably lose a few hundred more.  So then I explain the win/loss on divine intervention.  In my  gambling world at least ,  both luck and divine intevention exist and they are one and the same thing. Does not mean that I don't understand where you are coming from.

    1. 0
      crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It isn't about luck at all.  All things are governed by the same equation, the only thing that differs are the variables.  Just because you don't know all of the variables, and can't predict the outcome, that doesn't make it luck.

      Luck presumes a personal connection between events and outcomes.  No such personal connection exists.

  4. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    Would you consider  free will as the ultimately variable that could change the equation, thus nullifying your assertion that "all things are governed by the same equation".

    1. 0
      crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No because I don't believe in free will.

      I believe that choice is an illusion.  An elaborate deception our own mind plays.  In having an awareness of our thoughts we believe we control them, we don't.  That awareness, though an important variable in the equation of the mind, behaves no differently than feedback in a control system.  Choice is an illusion.  Man is philosophically absolved of responsibility for his behaviour.  We are dictated entirely by the interplay of our nature and nurture that we have no control over.  Any choices that you believe you have made are the only choices that you could have made.  Everything that has come before that moment of choice, contributed to the choice you made.  You believed you weighed the options and made a decision, but really, the decision you made was the only one you could have made.  Your awareness of your thought processes, feeds your thought processes; but in the only way that they could given everything that came before.  There is no control, and there is no choice.

  5. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    If  we follow your notion to its logical conclusion, then your existence (physical or otherwise)  is also philosophically an illusion.

    1. 0
      crmhaskeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      This is just faulty logic.  Your conclusion does not in any way follow from the premise.

  6. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    and the fact that we are exchanging ideas through an electronic medium is also an illusion.

  7. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    I didn't say I was any good at making logical aspersions and conclusions. Be that as it may I have to take leave now, ( sleep beckons) which is a choice I am making despite  the fact that my mind is illogical and not really free to make such a logical choice.

  8. A.Villarasa profile image79
    A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago

    Impressive academic resume by  the way... which I am sure are not illusory

  9. mega1 profile image80
    mega1posted 6 years ago

    it's neither - there is the amazing phenomenon of synchronicity and I can't explain it but it's not from a God or luck - it is the world at work!  consciously and subconsciouly.  But if its more fun to believe in divine intervention - knock yourself out!

    1. A.Villarasa profile image79
      A.Villarasaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Did synchronicity initiate the "Big Bang" ( although still a theory a lot of like minded and fair minded physicist seem to believe in it) or did the "Big Bang" produce synchronicity.  Is there proof that  synchronicity exist as the primal mover of the universe as you propose in your post?

  10. brotheryochanan profile image60
    brotheryochananposted 6 years ago

    When i was an unsaved unbeliever in the God of the bible i purported that things were derived at by way of luck and chance.

    Now that i am saved and a believer in the God of the bible i see that i should have given God the credit for helping me even when i did not know him.

    Chance and luck are man's inventions.
    God has promised to provide for all. The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

    Its nice now that i know who to give credit for when things go well.

 
working