> Unfortunately, preventing what is to come is not within our control.
> it is necessary to focus on the following more important concept: So, what will happen next?
These two statements seem contradictory. These kinds of propositions always left me wondering where they come from. Viewing the universe as deterministic, yeah, I see how "preventing what is to come is not within our control" could be a true statement. But who's to say what is inevitable and what is negotiable in the first place? Is the future written in stone, or are we able to as a society negotiate what arrangements we desire?
The concepts of "preventing what is to come is not within our control" and "So, what will happen next?" do not philosophically contradict each other. Furthermore, what I am referring to here is not necessarily related to determinism.
The question "What will happen next?" implies that something may have already happened now, but in the next step, different things will unfold. Preventing certain outcomes is difficult because knowledge does not belong to a single entity. Even if one manages to block something on a local scale, events will continue to unfold at a broader level.
> it is necessary to focus on the following more important concept: So, what will happen next?
These two statements seem contradictory. These kinds of propositions always left me wondering where they come from. Viewing the universe as deterministic, yeah, I see how "preventing what is to come is not within our control" could be a true statement. But who's to say what is inevitable and what is negotiable in the first place? Is the future written in stone, or are we able to as a society negotiate what arrangements we desire?