Consider the philosophical question of destiny: does it exist? Are we creatures chained to fate, or are we burdened with the anxiety of free will? The true question is, do we really want to know? With that, I think no, we don't. A common adage is "ignorance is bliss," but I feel it is far too simple and possesses a rather condescending connotation. I believe that there is a beauty and necessity to life being ambiguous. Furthermore, this applies to many areas, not just the serious question of destiny.
A fairly personal example for me included an acclaimed and quite evocative television series. To be succinct, the ending depicts the main character sacrificing himself for the greater good, to unite the world in a hatred for him, without society knowing he had actually done it to fulfill that purpose. However, the closing scenes display him possibly alive in hiding, and there are clues from previous episodes to suggest the same. But it cannot be confirmed. There is not enough evidence to sway either side to a unanimous consensus. Arguably, this is what made the ending so fantastic and talked about for ages after. It is the beauty of not knowing, of being able to make a faith-based decision on the side in which you believe.
It doesn't matter which one was right, because both were neither right nor wrong - what made the difference is the invested value of the belief. To some he is alive, and to others he is dead. This fundamentally changes the meaning of the show as well, in that some believe he is dead as it makes his cause more meaningful, while others believe him alive since they feel he had a duty to those he had made promises. It reveals both the character of individuals watching, and what they find meaningful. For individuals like me, it even helps solidify what I believe in, another irony considering how liquid and free ambiguity is.
Now let's come back to fate and destiny. This is exponentially farther reaching than my personal example and helps delineate the absolute gravity of what science and fulfilling curiosity's demands might mean. Part of the virtue and appeal of the argument is, again, people choose what they find best fits them according to what they believe in and think is good for the world. People whose faith belongs to free will believe that individuals have the capacity to choose their actions, and thus evil acts and good acts are done by all people; people can change, be remorseful, and there is hope that they can choose or be taught for the better. That we, as individuals, are responsible for the dark actions we accomplish (scary in and of itself ), how purposeless life can seem without destiny, the Kierkegaard-esque anxiety of life decisions, the weight of those decisions (something relevant to my peers and me), and how much worse failure feels when it is because of you and not destiny. On the other hand, for those who believe in destiny, the world is quite different. There is no evil or good, just the preordained, and this could be optimistic ("God has a plan") or pessimistic (humans are biologically wired for destruction).
The future seems less scary when you have faith that everything is already planned, but when that plan for you is negative, it renders one powerless. Fortunately, as we live now, neither are set in stone. It is up to you to make your decision, and what you believe it is, and how you wish to color the lenses through which you see life, whether it be with the anxiety of freedom or the dictatorship of destiny, or perhaps a mixture of the two, such as destined life events in between chaotic boundlessness. People of different beliefs and different values can subscribe to any of them, and it works. It is their way of life, and allows them to keep going and progress, because of that faith.
Now say science continues to fruition, and everything is answered. What negatives could occur? For example, the study of genetics has come pretty far already, and the influence and control of behavior by genes is unnerving to many, including myself. Is our fate bound to our genetic code? Are some people destined for lives of depression, while others ordained to be psychotic killers, just time bombs waiting for the genes to express themselves? In doing so, faith for the other side is removed, and those individuals are forced to an unwanted system. It changes them fundamentally, and most likely not for the better.
Where would this leave us? Am I asking if we should just stop searching for answers? Not exactly; after all, I am typing this on a laptop, sipping tea that grew in China, and wearing quality clothing (well, compared to cavemen) made in Thailand, all fruits of science's labor. Yet, like the Greeks espoused, "Moderation is the guide of life." I believe there are questions that should remain unanswered for the betterment of all, and that sometimes ignorance is indeed bliss; funnily, and perhaps unfortunately, there are those who would refute, but that's the beautiful indecision that I wrote here to uphold.
