DO YOU BELIEVE IN LUCK?
We are lucky primarily when the events are favourable to us unexpectedly and without having planned anything about it
Victor Manuel Guzman Villena
R.E.A.A.
Hopefully we find ourselves in a situation where the result of all our intents and purposes depends on chance. For example, the bank robber, which is recognized by a security guard who just started a new job at that bank, and already knew the thief because he had previously seen his action in another branch, the robber had no luck.
While the good luck is usually related with the events that are favorable (adverse if they fail) so unexpected, "by chance", "likely". In my youth I played Russian roulette and I am alive to tell you. I was lucky despite the fact the revolver was loaded with only one bullet so that the odds favored my survival. It was only "by chance" that I leave the game well and alive. Someone who comes out unscathed from a serious accident are lucky, even if in the accident were more people involved, and most of them managed to survive (for example, in this case survive was a probability).
We would say I had luck since was only by chance that been a survivor among the few fortunates and not among the unfortunate. Indeed, when the number of probability is very high and what it is left to chance is minimal, would be more accurate to speak of fortune rather than luck. (Whoever wins the lottery are lucky, the one who has not won, has been unfortunate)
The fate interrupts the normal evolution of events. Accordingly, we have certainly not right to expect that "the fate is with us ". It is precisely because we live in a world where things do not go well for what we normally we tend to think that when developments are favorable to us is something special, and is why we say "we have had a lucky break." Having "a streak of good luck" is more unusual and therefore worth to celebrate the good fortune.
We are lucky primarily when the events are favourable to us unexpectedly and without having planned anything about it, and we are very lucky when something happens against all odds. If you lose a needle in a haystack and find it in the first pile of grass you're looking at that event like been lucky. To speak of chance an event has to happen against all odds trustworthy.
Whoever wins the bingo is lucky, but whoever loses, knowing the low probability of winning, has no right to say is bad luck, despite the fact that in a sense has been unfortunate. "You should have seen it coming" because this was something highly probable; Predictably and should not be surprised at all. According to statistics, a person would fly daily over 4,000 years to expect that an accident occurred (and even in this case would have a chance of surviving). So we can not talk about lucky if we reach our destination safely, although it is true, of course we would have bad luck if we suffer a setback.
According to this, the fate involves the impossibility of predicting. But an analysis that determines when an event can be described as lucky must choose between one of the following alternatives: (1) that is rationally unpredictable, (2) it is indeed unexpected for the affected individuals, and (3) under normal circumstances That is rationally unpredictable for beneficiaries, but in principle can be predictable by others on their behalf.; We are not going to choose the first option, when a person with an unknown rich uncle gets a big present in his birthday, that is not luck . It is also ruled out the second option to who wins the lottery because they had a blind trust (but absurd). The complex combination that works in the third case shows the right path to follow in such circumstances.
A decision united with the ability, talent, intuition and effort takes away the fate of the scene. The things that go wrong given the lack of diligence, effort and skills can not be properly attributed to bad luck. That person who goes all wrong for being an incompetent is unfortunate, but we can not say he(she) does not have luck as the result of their actions, the result is absolutely "expected". But if we consider the case of tourist who is in the middle of a catastrophe from which he is not responsible, we must admit that this man had no luck. However, there are also more complex cases. The reckless driver who has an accident in circumstances where usually nothing happens, apart from not having luck is unfortunate. where things go either purely accidental, given the inadequacy of the information is handled, you can still say you've been lucky.
The fact attributed the good fortune may be inappropriate to demonstrate that there is nothing important at stake, (that the outcome of events is neither good nor bad, but absolutely indifferent), or to prove that what apparently was not unpredictable was real in the sense that the person concerned had good reason to expect a particular result (for example, as the logical outcome after having made certain efforts).
Good luck requires that the favourable outcome is not the result of normal course of things, nor the result of a plan or forecast, but "by mistake", for reasons totally unrelated to us or as the Lexicon Philosophicum of Goclenius of 1613 " other than the result of hard work, intuition, or the sagacity of a man, but totally hidden causes. " In such a way that the fate of the contest makes the outcome depend on what happens by chance and not what has been previously planned. Whenever we talk about luck, the risk comes into play, so unpredictable, leaving space for a surprise. Being reasonable we can not expect to collect apples from a pear tree. If everything is in our side the events are favourable and they are the fruit of the effort, and if we have adverse circumstances caused by mistakes or failures or irresponsibility, that is, when the chance is not involved, we can not talk about luck.
A person who allows an individual that ends with the savings of a lifetime is unfortunate, but properly speaking, we can not say that person do not get luck. Yes we could talk about luck, however, if they lose all these savings in a promising financial adventure . (In the event that the individual in question had chosen his victim among a group at random, it could be said that besides unfortunate, also had bad luck).
While the good luck is usually related with the events that are favorable (adverse if they fail) so unexpected, "by chance", "likely". In my youth I played Russian roulette and I am alive to tell you. I was lucky despite the fact the revolver was loaded with only one bullet so that the odds favored my survival. It was only "by chance" that I leave the game well and alive. Someone who comes out unscathed from a serious accident are lucky, even if in the accident were more people involved, and most of them managed to survive (for example, in this case survive was a probability).
We would say I had luck since was only by chance that been a survivor among the few fortunates and not among the unfortunate. Indeed, when the number of probability is very high and what it is left to chance is minimal, would be more accurate to speak of fortune rather than luck. (Whoever wins the lottery are lucky, the one who has not won, has been unfortunate)
The fate interrupts the normal evolution of events. Accordingly, we have certainly not right to expect that "the fate is with us ". It is precisely because we live in a world where things do not go well for what we normally we tend to think that when developments are favorable to us is something special, and is why we say "we have had a lucky break." Having "a streak of good luck" is more unusual and therefore worth to celebrate the good fortune.
We are lucky primarily when the events are favourable to us unexpectedly and without having planned anything about it, and we are very lucky when something happens against all odds. If you lose a needle in a haystack and find it in the first pile of grass you're looking at that event like been lucky. To speak of chance an event has to happen against all odds trustworthy.
Whoever wins the bingo is lucky, but whoever loses, knowing the low probability of winning, has no right to say is bad luck, despite the fact that in a sense has been unfortunate. "You should have seen it coming" because this was something highly probable; Predictably and should not be surprised at all. According to statistics, a person would fly daily over 4,000 years to expect that an accident occurred (and even in this case would have a chance of surviving). So we can not talk about lucky if we reach our destination safely, although it is true, of course we would have bad luck if we suffer a setback.
According to this, the fate involves the impossibility of predicting. But an analysis that determines when an event can be described as lucky must choose between one of the following alternatives: (1) that is rationally unpredictable, (2) it is indeed unexpected for the affected individuals, and (3) under normal circumstances That is rationally unpredictable for beneficiaries, but in principle can be predictable by others on their behalf.; We are not going to choose the first option, when a person with an unknown rich uncle gets a big present in his birthday, that is not luck . It is also ruled out the second option to who wins the lottery because they had a blind trust (but absurd). The complex combination that works in the third case shows the right path to follow in such circumstances.
A decision united with the ability, talent, intuition and effort takes away the fate of the scene. The things that go wrong given the lack of diligence, effort and skills can not be properly attributed to bad luck. That person who goes all wrong for being an incompetent is unfortunate, but we can not say he(she) does not have luck as the result of their actions, the result is absolutely "expected". But if we consider the case of tourist who is in the middle of a catastrophe from which he is not responsible, we must admit that this man had no luck. However, there are also more complex cases. The reckless driver who has an accident in circumstances where usually nothing happens, apart from not having luck is unfortunate. where things go either purely accidental, given the inadequacy of the information is handled, you can still say you've been lucky.
The fact attributed the good fortune may be inappropriate to demonstrate that there is nothing important at stake, (that the outcome of events is neither good nor bad, but absolutely indifferent), or to prove that what apparently was not unpredictable was real in the sense that the person concerned had good reason to expect a particular result (for example, as the logical outcome after having made certain efforts).
Good luck requires that the favourable outcome is not the result of normal course of things, nor the result of a plan or forecast, but "by mistake", for reasons totally unrelated to us or as the Lexicon Philosophicum of Goclenius of 1613 " other than the result of hard work, intuition, or the sagacity of a man, but totally hidden causes. " In such a way that the fate of the contest makes the outcome depend on what happens by chance and not what has been previously planned. Whenever we talk about luck, the risk comes into play, so unpredictable, leaving space for a surprise. Being reasonable we can not expect to collect apples from a pear tree. If everything is in our side the events are favourable and they are the fruit of the effort, and if we have adverse circumstances caused by mistakes or failures or irresponsibility, that is, when the chance is not involved, we can not talk about luck.
A person who allows an individual that ends with the savings of a lifetime is unfortunate, but properly speaking, we can not say that person do not get luck. Yes we could talk about luck, however, if they lose all these savings in a promising financial adventure . (In the event that the individual in question had chosen his victim among a group at random, it could be said that besides unfortunate, also had bad luck).
No comments:
Post a Comment