Are Predestionation , Fatalism and determinism different ?

[Darkragnar]

As the topic states are Predestioation , fatalism and determinism different from each other and do u suscribe to any of them ?

Me personally dont see a difference between them atm.

[Elfdude]

They are pretty much one in the same except I believe predestination is just religious flavoring to the other two concepts. They basically all refer to destiny. I myself do not subscribe to destiny, I know that my actions as well as the actions of others collapse the wave of probable outcomes that is time. Obviously there's limits to our choice but I'd assert there's always a choice.

[Wolfgang von Zweibrücken]

When you get into the Calvinist or Lutheran concept of "predestination" it is an over-simplification to describe it as "fatalism", because of the idea that good acts are an outward indicater that one is predestined for salvation. It is a very strange theology, but not really "fatalistic", in my opinion, because it is an active rather than a passive belief.

Personally, I do not ascribe to predestination.

[SigniferOne]

Predestination sounds similar to determinism except for one thing: their consequences. Determinism brings fatalism and essentially nihilism (no reason for life), so the question is whether Predestination brings that. And the essence is, if you think very carefully on Calvin's Institutes, that you don't know how you're predestined. You are, but you simply don't know which way you are, and so your only outcome, the only thing left for you to do, is to just live the best life that's possible to you, the most immaculate virtuous life you can, as that's the only thing left in your power. The consequence of Calvin's point, fairly profound at that, is to not worry about the coming God's judgment (as already made either way), and focus all of your energies on making your inner life noble. This is why all of the Calvinist cultures, the Puritans, the Swiss, have had an incredible work ethic, and an insuperable belief in success.

[Mythre]

Predestination sounds similar to determinism except for one thing: their consequences. Determinism brings fatalism and essentially nihilism (no reason for life), so the question is whether Predestination brings that. And the essence is, if you think very carefully on Calvin's Institutes, that you don't know how you're predestined. You are, but you simply don't know which way you are, and so your only outcome, the only thing left for you to do, is to just live the best life that's possible to you, the most immaculate virtuous life you can, as that's the only thing left in your power. The consequence of Calvin's point, fairly profound at that, is to not worry about the coming God's judgment (as already made either way), and focus all of your energies on making your inner life noble. This is why all of the Calvinist cultures, the Puritans, the Swiss, have had an incredible work ethic, and an insuperable belief in success.

A good post, although I think you missed some the Theological Ramifications of the Doctrine.

In essence, it boils down to God does the saving, no one else and not by anyone's power but God's.

[SigniferOne]

Correct. My point is that it's the opposite of how, say, the atheistic (materialistic) determinism affects a person. Calvinistic determinism has empowered people, freed them from fear, and thrust a tremendous desire to discipline and improve themselves. Calvin predicted this in his Institutes when he said, don't worry about whether you've been saved by God or not. If you want to, heck, go ahead and assume you are -- but then, act like one.

And historically this has proven itself out.

[Tankbuster]

Determinism brings order in the natural world. Yet for some reason people are scared of determinism and think it is akin to fatalism (let alone nihilism). This is not true. The whole concept is riddled with misunderstandings.
The definition of determinism is simply that given the present state of the universe, the future states of the universe are fixed. There are some discrepancies in the definitions (specifically the difference between epistemic and ontic determinism) but that's usually the gist of it.
This concept is used in science and physics to make sense of the world, but it is really an assumption we work under rather than the result of what we know about physics: currently it's dubious that the world is in fact deterministic.

However if you think about this carefully, you immediately see that human beings can, say, compare arguments, predict consequences, and think about their goals and values even if we and the world are fully deterministic: they simply do not rule each other out.

Fatalism is something else alltogether: fatalism means that you can't change anything about the future. This is fundamentally different from determinism, because even if the world is deterministic, that does not mean my actions don't impact the future: if I pick a given action over another, then the universe will look differently from if I had done another action (the question of whether not my actions are deterministic is besides the point).
If my actions are of consequence to the future (and we have every reason to assume that this is the case) then fatalism is wrong, regardless of determinism.
By the way, determinism is not even necessary for fatalism: it's perfectly possible that even in a non-deterministic world, you can't change anything about the future; it all depends on what your power and possibilities in this world are.

Determinism also doesn't even begin to touch our moral responsibilities. It's a misconception that determinism might lead lead to us being able to remove the burden of responsability from ourselves. For example a teacher can choose whether or not he teaches his students interesting and necessary things: both of these will affect the future states of the universe a little bit (determinism) but said teacher cannot use determinism to remove his responsability to pick one over the other! When someone screws up in the past, they will have to take responsability for that: that's a factor that plays into the decisions one has to take now.
And freedom clearly does not pre-suppose an indeterministic world either: an indeterministic would simply mean that there's a certain amount of randomness and unpredictable coincidences that can influence the future. That's not freedom: that's randomness.
And likewise freedom is not antithetical to determinism.

So anyway, fatalism and determinism have little to nothing to do with each other. As for predestination, it may or may not be akin to determinism (in most definitions it's something else altogether: whether or not the world is deterministic and whether or not God already knows whether you're going to heaven or hell are two completely distinct questions) but I'm not a protestant so you'll have to listen to resident protestants on that point.