Nothing is Meant to Be, and That’s Awesome
Mike Sturm
19511

I’m trying to understand this article from my perspective of life. Let me see if I get this straight.

You don’t understand the “it was meant to be” sentiment (per relationships).

You are now in a committed relationship and understand it is work (there is active effort) to make it a success.

So, why is the notion of choice and effort completely disjoint from the notion of “meant to be” (fate?) in your world view? I do not see an explanation for this, only a statement that you don’t understand it, and that you feel it is more beautiful and inspiring to you that these are disjoint.

I have a different world view, for many reasons, not the least of which is my faith and experience. Maybe I’m biased by that, and also the fact that I’m a research scientist, but I mostly do not understand the thought process here. Scientists can never approach a problem by the way of thinking that starts with ‘I don’t understand something’ and ending with ‘so it must not be true’, while providing no data driven approach, or even philosophical reasoning (a la Arrow’s impossibility theorem), and keeping with the ‘I don’t understand it’ aspect (as a scientists you have then learned nothing).

What is the basis for your commitment, philosophically speaking?

As a believer in certain things, one of which is the intersection of ‘work in a relationship’ and that relationship being ‘meant to be’, I can easily pick every data point you have presented here and reinforce my position.

None of the relationships you were in were successful. You could not work those relationships to fulfillment. The relationships were not ‘meant to be’.

The relationship you are in now is successful. You know how to work in this relationship. The relationship is ‘meant to be’.

I can only believe these things if they are within my world view.

Scientists must create theories for physical phenomena they don’t understand. These theories must explain the data, both the positive data of the event, and the negative data that constrains the positive data. (A great non-technical article on negative results constraining positive results: goo.gl/xHetgn)

Here it seems you have a negative constraint; you don’t feel things are meant to be.

And you have a positive data point: working at a relationship makes it successful.

I challenge your world view by finding a theory that can successfully include both, and present that to the audience. You have presented the two data points, but have not presented your rationale for your view. I’d love to hear it. Perhaps there is even more beauty to be found by discovering a theory and world view that encompasses both data points.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Caged’s story.