Amor Fati (a love of fate)
The phrase above, written in Latin “Amor Fati” originally comes from the Stoic School of Greek Philosophy although Nietzche’s work is also, often identified as being amor fati. This term…he wrote: “My formula for greatness in a human being is amor fati: this means that nothing is different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity. Not merely bear what is necessary, still less conceal it – all idealism is mendaciousness in the face of what is necessary – but love it.”
I was drawn to this phrase because, to me, amour fati suggests a feeling of contentment (and finding peace through contentment is what I consider the highest good among human endeavours). Someone who loves their fate must surely be a person who is satisfied with their life! They do not reflect on past events and wish they were different, and they do not wish for a different future…they have learned to accept their fate and, in some cases, embrace it completely. This state of mind sounds like contentment to me.
The School of philosophy known as Stoicism originated in Greece in the 3rd century B.C. It’s founder was Zeno who postulated that virtue was composed of four things:
Wisdom, justice,courage and moderation.
Zeno believed that virtue was the highest good, and is based on knowledge and logic- the wise live in harmony with Reason which , he believed, is also immersed in Nature. The Stoics elevated knowledge of nature to being the ultimate form of truth and wisdom…logic was also paramount in their theory of the world.
They did not expect happiness from external events in their life –instead, their goal was to always stay centered in the face of distraction. Forgetting ego and vanity. They put a premium on courage, kindness, humility and serenity – all these values, they claim, make up a person’s character and are evident in all our actions. One must ask, can Stoics change their emotional response to events in their lives, or are they required to passively accept the immediate emotional impact? Can Stoics sometimes find the so-called ‘silver lining’ in some of those negative events that occur in their lives?
It is this line of thinking brings me to the 20th century philosophy called Existentialism, championed by Jean-Paul Sartre, which has some similarities to Stoicism, but is punctuated by stark differences.
Existentialism is primarily an investigation into the most fundamental meaning of living life, that of Being. It claims that individuals are free agents who control their choices and actions (source Encyclopedia Britannica). Futhermore, existentialists believe society should not restrict an individual’s life because these restrictions inhibit ‘free will’ and the development of that person’s potential (Britannica Encyclopedia).
Existence is all we have when we are born. Our life has no intrinsic meaning according to Existentialists.
Sartre offers a way out of existentialist despair in his book, “Sketch for a theory of the Emotions” where he states in the introduction that he does not intend to present a phenomenological study of emotion. Such a study would deal "with affectivity as an existential mode of human reality." His aim is to apply to the psychological study of emotion phenomenological methods. Not facts are to be gathered but the significance of phenomena will be analyzed. After discussing the classical theories and the psychoanalytical theory he sketches a phenomenological theory of emotions. This is a finalistic theory; emotion is a way of coping with the world. When realistic action becomes too difficult, a reorganization of the psychological environment ensues and the world will be seen and acted upon in a magic way. Fainting in terror is a magical action with the purpose of annihilating the danger. Joy tends magically "to realize the possession of the desired object as instantaneous totality." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved.)
In this last belief I see some common ground with the Stoics. One key difference is that Existentialists have a profound sense of anxiety which is not present in Stoics… whose love of fate yields a more contented and positive feeling and, dare I say, a hopeful outlook on life. As T.Z. Lavine most beautifully writes about Existentialism:
“When I consider the short duration of my life, swallowed up in the eternity before and after, and the little space I fill, and can even see, engulfed in the infinite immensity of space of which I’m ignorant, and which knows me not, I am frightened and astonished at being here and not there, why now rather than then.”
Elsewhere Lavine writes of our predicament:
“I stand in anguish at the edge of the abyss. I am my own existence, but my existence is nothingness. I am nothing else but my conscious existence.” Pretty bleak thinking!
I find Existentialism a brave and courageous way of looking at our life…a courage it shares with Stoicism…but the very idea of Fate would not find favour with any Existentialist – in contrast they believe that they are ‘free agents’ and, therefore, take full responsibility for creating their Essence (i.e.who they are).
Lao Tzu famously said, “To do is to be”. Sounds like an Existentialist precept? Sure it does! A way out from Existentialist despair and angst can be found in the Taoist concept of “The Way”, or the “Tao”. For Taoism, the Tao (the way) is the origin of all things in the universe (and it’s embedded in Nature and Reminiscent of the preamble in the Gospel of John in the New Testament and eerily similar to the concept of the ‘force’ in the Star Wars movies). This concept echoes the Stoic emphasis on the knowledge of Nature as a pathway to wisdom. It is through this knowledge that we find serenity.
Once more I am drawn back to the great mythologist, Joseph Campbell, who found myths, ancient and modern, as teachings that hold the key to the human condition. His concept of “Bliss” holds a solution to Existentialist despair. He writes: “If you follow your bliss, you put yourself on a kind of track that has been there all the while, waiting for you, and the life you ought to be living is the one you are living. Wherever you are – if you are following your bliss, you are enjoying that refreshment, that life within you, all the time.” Sounds a little like Sartre’s magic of emotions. Elsewhere Joseph Campbell speaks of one’s search for meaning of life and he contends that “what we are really seeking is an experience of being alive, so that our life experience on the purely physical plane will have resonances with our innermost being and reality, so that we actually feel the rapture (my emphasis) of being alive.”
In my opinion following our bliss offers a solution to both Stoics and Existentialists.
What then is bliss? For me, it is something that makes you happy and joyful. When I played professional golf, occasionally I found bliss when I entered what was called the ‘zone’. This is the place where you become oblivious to all distractions… I would play without fear and could mentally picture a shot and without conscious thought or any doubt would execute it. I became the game I was playing… effortlessly scoring the best I could ever hope for under normal circumstances. Usually I would stand over the ball and fret about the shot. When I was in the ‘zone’ I simply, almost unconsciously, executed excellent shots, time and again. Finding my way into that ‘zone’ was never easy but it often happened when I was just fed up with my progress during a round… without seeking this state of bliss it simply arrived, almost magically. I felt like the best player in the world during those moments… almost invincible… blissfully happy about my series of shots and excellent scoring. It was as if I was simply “letting go” and letting my latent skills and talent finally come to the fore front. It was as if I got out of my own way.
If Campbell is right, then this pursuit of one’s bliss is like a balm for the soul…as he writes: “it starts you on a path that has been waiting for you. The key is to identify a pursuit that you are truly passionate about, and then follow that course of action, then you’ll meet other like-minded people who will help you and open doors for you where you once only saw walls.
Suddenly you feel that you are a participant in life…you are really ‘in your life.’”
Campbell’s words bring me to a book called ‘Zen in the Art of Archery’ written by Herrigal. This German philosopher spent a year in Japan trying to understand the philosophy of Zen… which he gives an excellent description of my concept of the ‘zone’: “In the case of archery, the hitter and the hit are no longer two opposing objects, but are one reality. The archer ceases to be conscious of himself as the one who is engaged in hitting the bull’s-eye which confronts him. This state of unconsciousness is realized only when, completely empty and rid of the self, he becomes one with the perfecting of his technical skill, though there is in it something of a quite different order which cannot be attained byb any progressive study of the art…”
