Where risk is greatest, fatalism paradoxically returns

Evidence

Where risk is known to be risk, it is experienced differently from circumstances in which notions of fortuna prevail. To recognise the existence of a risk or set of risks is to accept not just the possibility that things might go wrong, but that this possibility cannot be eliminated. The phenomenology of such a situation is part of the cultural experience of modernity in general, discussed in more detail below. Even where the hold of traditional religion becomes relaxed, however, conceptions of fate do not wholly disappear. Precisely where risks are greatest—either in terms of the perceived probability that an unwelcome happening will occur or in terms of the devastating consequences that ensue if a given event goes awry—fortuna tends to return. — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 264

Categorization

• XREF: This paradox of fatalism returning at peak risk speaks directly to Stevens’s passivity at the moment of greatest ethical stakes — a deferral to fortuna rather than agency. — connects to: Fate returns as a psychological support in secular modern risk environments — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 323; The early modern concept of risk replaced fortuna as a general feature of life — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 1350; Demonstrated risk can succeed precisely because it is risky — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 809 (+1 more)

Related

• Fate returns as a psychological support in secular modern risk environments (similarity 0.88)
• The early modern concept of risk replaced fortuna as a general feature of life (similarity 0.83)
• Fatalism is active will disguised while in a weak position (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Fate returns as a psychological support in secular modern risk environments #expands (0.85) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 323