Amor Fati
or
Fortuna Non Omnibus Aeque
March 1, 2017
G.D.O’Bradovich III
fortuna non omnibus aeque
The love of fate versus fortune is not the same for all.
What shall we say?
Saint Paul suggests some vessels are predestined for honor, while others for dishonor, otherwise said, some people have tragedy in their blood.
If the outcome of the greatest game, life, is predestined, then playing the game has no ultimate meaning, the illusion of meaningless choices notwithstanding. Yet, why would existence be predetermined? To what end? To demonstrate the craftsman is in control seems like trite reasoning: for the power of the Great Potter of the Universe will be revealed in due time: predestination seems to be unnecessary.
If the outcome is decided and the result is beyond our control, then what is this idea, but a justification for modern promotion of nihilism?
Shall we say that the absence of meaning of life, is the purpose of life?
From our perspective as finite beings, we cannot know, nor can we determine, if our existence has either a current purpose, or an ultimate meaning. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume, until otherwise demonstrated to our satisfaction, that we should behave accordingly. As always, price and participation will vary.
While we agree that fortune is not the same for all in this world, we remain uncertain if one should, or should not, love one’s fate.
If we accept that love is the recognition of one's highest virtues, and as we should possess our highest virtues, then it seems that we should love our fate. We note that virtues do not constitute the totality of an individual, while fate implies all of one's life. Therefore, we can recognise our virtues, but not necessarily love our fate.
We know that men are born equal, and have equality in death, but their lives are unique, therefore, we conclude from our experience that fortune is not the same for all.
If predestination exists, then we only know that we will experience death. The love of fate implies that we should acknowledge our final destination and, accordingly, embrace our love of life. This implication is not a certainty.
Unfortunately, we find ourselves in an unenviable, although familiar, position. We have neither discovered nor determined any insights from our earnest inquiry concerning both fate and fortune.
The Gentle Reader may conclude that our efforts have been frustrated by either unseen powers or undermined by vanity. We have pondered various ideas and attempted to reconcile similar concepts. If we have failed, then we suggest that these motifs, while seeming similar, are, if not opposed, then fundamentally different. We acknowledge that certain authors may have various and unrelated ideas regarding subjective matters. The Gentle Researcher now knows, and perhaps always suspected, that fortune is unique.
In conclusion, we can only hope that the disciple outshines the Master. The expectations of success, either in this life, or the world to come, are not without merit and, therefore, entirely reasonable.
What shall we say?
Saint Paul suggests some vessels are predestined for honor, while others for dishonor, otherwise said, some people have tragedy in their blood.
If the outcome of the greatest game, life, is predestined, then playing the game has no ultimate meaning, the illusion of meaningless choices notwithstanding. Yet, why would existence be predetermined? To what end? To demonstrate the craftsman is in control seems like trite reasoning: for the power of the Great Potter of the Universe will be revealed in due time: predestination seems to be unnecessary.
If the outcome is decided and the result is beyond our control, then what is this idea, but a justification for modern promotion of nihilism?
Shall we say that the absence of meaning of life, is the purpose of life?
From our perspective as finite beings, we cannot know, nor can we determine, if our existence has either a current purpose, or an ultimate meaning. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume, until otherwise demonstrated to our satisfaction, that we should behave accordingly. As always, price and participation will vary.
While we agree that fortune is not the same for all in this world, we remain uncertain if one should, or should not, love one’s fate.
If we accept that love is the recognition of one's highest virtues, and as we should possess our highest virtues, then it seems that we should love our fate. We note that virtues do not constitute the totality of an individual, while fate implies all of one's life. Therefore, we can recognise our virtues, but not necessarily love our fate.
We know that men are born equal, and have equality in death, but their lives are unique, therefore, we conclude from our experience that fortune is not the same for all.
If predestination exists, then we only know that we will experience death. The love of fate implies that we should acknowledge our final destination and, accordingly, embrace our love of life. This implication is not a certainty.
Unfortunately, we find ourselves in an unenviable, although familiar, position. We have neither discovered nor determined any insights from our earnest inquiry concerning both fate and fortune.
The Gentle Reader may conclude that our efforts have been frustrated by either unseen powers or undermined by vanity. We have pondered various ideas and attempted to reconcile similar concepts. If we have failed, then we suggest that these motifs, while seeming similar, are, if not opposed, then fundamentally different. We acknowledge that certain authors may have various and unrelated ideas regarding subjective matters. The Gentle Researcher now knows, and perhaps always suspected, that fortune is unique.
In conclusion, we can only hope that the disciple outshines the Master. The expectations of success, either in this life, or the world to come, are not without merit and, therefore, entirely reasonable.