Skip to Content

Asian Tribune is published by World Institute For Asian Studies|Powered by WIAS Vol. 12 No. 1585

Are You Lacking In Power To Direct Your Own Destiny?

By Mahinda Weerasinghe -

Indeed should you be called upon to account for your actions, you don’t have to, if you are an adherent of either the creationist or Darwinist school of thought.

In fact though human species has somehow blundered into the 21st century and made giant technological strides to explore the outer reaches of the cosmos, he is still aimlessly fumbling with the most vital question:

Are our fate and destiny fatalistically or mechanistically determined by
external forces? In other words, is it an entity called God who has created all things or does “natural selection” explain the reason for the existence of diversity of species.

Indeed the recriminations and innuendo of the two groups of determinists(i.e. the creationist and the evolutionist) has reached a boiling point on
the internet.

Though the public at large is unconcerned with such thoughts a battle is
looming on the horizon between the evolutionist and creationist.

Indeed the concept of DETERMINISM deals with the core issues of human nature, namely, whether the behaviour, thinking, actions and feelings of any being, is driven by something called “Free Will”.

Disagreement exists about the proper formulation of determinism, as the
idea is abstract, intangible, elusive and hard to pin down. Yet it goes to
the heart of all religions, philosophies, values and definitely the
Darwinistic notion of evolution itself.

The question is whether are we machines, pre-programmed, encoded and preordained by an external force, and hence without power to charter our own destiny?

According to the loose idea, Determinism is the theory that all the human actions are based on and caused entirely by preceding events, and not by theexercise of Free Will.

In fact creationist in order to slip over the theological dilemma points to
the “original sin” committed by our mythical ancestors “Adam and Eve”. And for that single sin (blunder, action, crime) all humanity has been put under interdict by God.

Evidently if we accept this as “gospel truth” then no single individual has
a choice in the matter, as he is compelled to pay for a crime committed by his fairy-tale ancestors - A most unethical situation.

In fact both Creationists and Darwinians try to explain Determinism after
the birth event has taken effect, hence allude to non-determinism. That is they imply, once we are born we have choices. If we grant conditionally that confinement as being the starting coordinates of an individual, still this can’t square the circle.

Simply said, at inception and on arriving at the birth scene, the individual has already inherited the following preconditions:

a.) A body and mind (Psychophysical situation)

b.) A socio-economic situation (ecological)

How, indeed, we simply did not create ourselves?

Not eschewing the fact that an actor has to act within the constraints of
his body and mind, which have been either awarded (by a God - creationist view) at creation, or emerged through a series of accidental chances (Darwinian notion) at the inception, still his choices are greatly

In other words if he is born a lunatic, a mad man or a mongoloid, he is
compelled to think and perform like a lunatic, a mad man or a mongoloid
appropriately, as his actions are propelled by the instrumentality of his
body-mind mechanism inherited and pre-programmed at conception or creation in the first instant.

Indeed how we can then be answerable for our actions is an abiding wonder!

Belief about the roles of free will and determinism of human nature is
critical to a society’s organization of relationships and the well being of
its members. But then going by the above mentioned logic, we are all hooked to a deterministic perspective of human nature, and under the circumstances all creatures would be totally innocent and should not be called to account for their actions, in the sense that, they did not create or fashion themselves and had no control over their mind and body when they were first conceived. So while we insist that the actor should be responsible and accountable for his actions, yet responsibility and personal accountability cannot be placed at the door step of the actor, as his urges and thinking are controlled by his inherited mind-body mechanism in the first instance.

Currently we recognise impact of such “half baked” ideas on the global
society. A larger Judeo-Christian confrontation is looming and the global
society is facing upheaval.

Judeo-Christian creeds insist that out of millions of species, God has
singled out this naked ape - Homo sapience sapiens, as his beloved. They offer no clarification for this odd behaviour of “their” God. Indeed we are informed that he has fashioned this creature in his own image, infused a ”soul” in him, and promised everlasting life to this “soul” in some heaven or a hell depending on his whims.

Followers are called upon to pray to the saviour, if they desire to receive
the rewards of his bountiful love. The purpose of this excise simply eludes me. Does the creator need some praying to get his ego boosted? Is he so juvenile that he needs assurance again and again from his specially created children that he is their God? In that case being an almighty, why didn’t he program some robots, which would do him obeisance round the clock? Indeed does this God take pleasure in famine, war, catastrophes, slaughter of children, AIDS cancer etc., etc., and does he feel ecstatic when species and tribes are at each other’s throat?

Believers of the alternative mechanistic view of life (Darwinist), nurses
an opinion that their account is totally rational. But in fact what they
possess is a slanted view of life. While they notify that other species
abide by a natural dictate termed, “survival of the fittest” the humans are
expressly discouraged to follow this principle. While Darwinians are asking us to accept the fact that the weak will be eliminated, the United Nations was promoting protection of the individual and defending his “human rights”. Darwinian “tooth and claw” life style was good enough for other species, but somehow not worthy for the human species to emulate.

As Darwinism was deficient of an ethical principle; to embrace its version of determinism, is to hang around and try to survive and await helplessly the outcome of the unfolding of blind impersonal material forces. Indeed under those circumstances we are compelled to bow down to a philosophy, that ”fittest will be naturally selected”. But in real human society we find it is not the “fittest” who survive, but the luckiest.

Currently, a single Judeo-Christian sect is bent on conquering the world
through terror. For this, they naturally have been following the good old
Darwinian dictates. They justify their militancy by contending that it is
the way of fulfilling “their” God’s will. And the opponents of these
fanatics, have stamped them as “terrorists”, and are hunting them down, with extreme prejudice.

But in reality, these fanatics are doing nothing extraordinarily
un-Darwinistic. As a human sub-species they are multiplying their prototype so that their kindred with their “locked-in, intolerant beliefs” can go on further in time and space, and take control of the human progeny. Indeed if by chance they succeed in their murderous intents, and be successful in their objectives, then they will certainly end up as being the “fittest”? If we tag along with such “hair brained” Darwinistic logic, then we would naturally end up in blind alleys of confusion.

But now we find these two “locked-in” theories of life are converging in a
most ominous fashion. So how can we blame such murderous groups such as Al Quida as they have been brain washed by such deterministic theories with which have been fed with their mother’s milk?

If terror galvanized a favourable outcome, and transformed the global
society’s multicultural lifestyle, and brought it round to a particular
Taliban Afghanistani model of behaviour, then they have fulfilled their God’s decrees while also following the good old Darwinian “survival of the
fittest” dictates. For we have to concede, if these fanatics are successful
in their machinations, then indisputably they are the fittest. That is how
God and Darwin have merged to undermine the freedom of man.

No wonder the intelligent people are desperately seeking a
non-deterministic version of life. And I find the only rational, logical,
and realistic one around, and indeed the only non-deterministic one in
existence is Buddha’s “Sensory Becoming” theory of life. If the world is to back off from a global Judeo-Christian confrontation then they must study this extremely subtle non-deterministic explanation of life by Buddha, viz,Sensory Becoming, or pay the ultimate price.

- Asian Tribune -

Share this