Fatalism

What is the proper Objectivist refutation of Fatalism? I tried to find some reference to Fatalism in the "Misbegotten Notions" section of SoloHQ, but could not find anything.

Post 1

Monday, November 17, 2003 - 7:21am

Nate, the definition of "fatalism" I found at m-w.com's online dictionary is: a doctrine that events are fixed in advance so that human beings are powerless to change them; also : a belief in or attitude determined by this doctrine

This is no different from determinism, so refuting determinism should refute fatalism as well.

Post 2

Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - 6:48am

Matthew,

As far as I can tell, Determinism is a type of Fatalism (i.e., under Determinism, one can, in theory, predict the future perfectly given perfect intial conditions) but Fatalism isn't necesarily a type of Determinsm, since there need not be a natural explanation for why things are "predestined" to happen (it could be some god or something). Perhaps Fatalism can be dismissed like god as an arbitrary idea, since there is no way to disprove it empirically?

Post 3

Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - 9:18am

That would make sense, Nate. On the other hand, don't the existence of human volition and the law of causality refute fatalism? Humans are free to choose their course, but their choices are limited by the effects of choices they've made in the past.

Post 4

Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - 11:16am