Hacker Chronicles 2/HACKER2.BIN/616.FEA4

Text File | 1993-08-30 | 6KB | 108 lines

Freewill vs. Predestiny
Copyright (c) Joe DeRouen, 1993
All rights reserved


                   Freewill vs. Predestiny
                        by Joe DeRouen


The question of "why do we make the choices that we make?" is a question
nearly as old as mankind itself, and as argued as the existence of Gods.
Those believing that mankind is led to whatever choices it makes by
either a supernatural force or by the environment it grew up in attend
the school of predestiny or determinism, while those who believe that
everyone has the ability to choose for themselves which paths to take
throughout life adhere to the theory of freewill.

Though a man may choose to shackle himself with ideas of determinism, he
is still making a choice. Free will is reality, the shining icon of
truth that holds the key to the fantasy of predestiny's binding and oft
rusted locks. A man can make the choice to follow the belief of
predestiny (in any of it's forms) but it is still a choice that he is
making.

Common teachings from the school of predestiny state that we are what we
are because of what our parents were; it a nutshell, what we become is
predetermined by how we grew up.

If John grows up in the slums and his father, unable (or unwilling) to
find a job, steals to feed his family, the boy will grow up to be a
thief as well. He'll be lazy and, instead of choosing to fight his way
out of the class he's been put into by working, will take the path of
least resistance and become what his father was. According to that
school of thought, he'll have no real choice in the matter.

Choices, even the hardest ones to make, are still choices. The road less
travelled is still a road, regardless of it's travellers. Yes, the sad
fact is that he boy depicted in my aforementioned example may well turn
out to be just like his father. However, he does have the potential to
overcome his background and to make the right choice, ultimately
transcending what his father was and what, according to the theory of
predestiny, he should have been.

Using the example of John again, let's hypothesize that he had turned
out as he had been "predestined" to. Let's also say that, in the act of
robbing a 7-11, he had shot and killed a man. Under the theory of
determinism, he would not be guilty of murder, for, even though he had
shot and killed the clerk, he could not help it; it had been
predetermined. Murdering the clerk was no more his choice than the color
of his skin or his gender. According to these theories, John really
hasn't done anything that he should be punished for, and thus is
innocent of any and all wrong doings.  Predestiny is but an excuse to
deny guilt, another way of saying "The Devil made me do it!"

Belief in freewill says that a man, when he makes a choice to do
something wrong (murdering the 7-11 clerk), is in full control of his
actions and should thus be punished for whatever crime he committed.
John had many different choices at many different instance leading up to
his murder of the clerk. At any time, he was free to turn from the path
he was following and take a different, better one. Again, the path of
least resistance is often the easiest to take but rarely the best.

The  phrases "He was destined to greatness." or "It was her time to
die." have been a part of our vocabulary for many, many generations.
Determinism holds that certain people are destined to "accomplish" (can
something preordained really be called an accomplishment?) certain
things, just as other people are destined to die at certain times or in
certain ways. Literature all through time holds stories of heroes being
prophesized into greatness, such as Jesus Christ, who's divined
"greatness" included dying for mankind's sins. Fortellings of doom can
also be found throughout history's literature, such as Sophocles'
"Oedipus Rex", who's destiny was to marry his mother and slay his
father, as prophesized by the Oracle at Delphi.

If their destiny was greatness, they had but naught to do to gain their
fame in the annals of history, nor could they do anything to prevent
their downfalls if their fate was something less than desired. In a
nutshell, their lives were in the hands of the  Gods.  These great
heroes from the past were mere playthings, subject to the whims and
wonders of fate.

Is life worth living knowing that, no matter what you do, no matter how
hard you try, you can't detour from the path you were put on at birth?
Imagine playing the video game Pac-Man. You put in your quarter and
begin living vicariously through the  small icon on the screen,
controlling him with your joystick. Pac-Man's movements, however, don't
match yours. You move right, but the little yellow image on the screen
moves upward. Before you know it, Pac-Man is gobbled up by the ghosts,
and your game is over.  We all know that life certainly isn't a
videogame, but the metaphor is an unsettling one just the same. Making
choices -right or wrong- is all part of living one's life. Life can't be
life without living. Without that, it becomes a perverted doppleganger,
a crippled double dancing in the imatitative shadows of the real thing.
Life without living.. just isn't.

The philosophy of freewill can never really be proven, nor can it be
disproven; neither can determinism. The proof lies within oneself and
the path less travelled, and in the choices that lie along that path.
Making your own decisions, admitting to your mistakes (and trying to
make amends for them), considering and pondering over new and unusual
ideas, living life to it's fullest, never truly knowing what lies around
the corner; this is freewill.

The shining icon of truth often hurts the darkened eyes of determinism,
but it is there just the same. There for the taking, for the brave hands
to grasp and, once grasping, to share with others and to truly be free.