That’s kind of like saying in order to be a atheist you need the concept of God to be false.
Not at all.
In order for an atheist’s belief to be true It needs to be the case that there is no God.
But of course somebody can be an atheist regardless of the truth of the matter.
You believe you influence the future. If you’re belief is a true belief then necessitarianism is false.
Not to be picky, ok maybe a little picky
You say for an atheist’s belief to be true, “X” has to be false.
While for my belief to be true, “X” has to be false.
The only difference is what X is. God vs necessitarianism.
Also the moon influences the future. I suspect I can do at least as much.
The real difference IMO between necessitarianism and determinism is that of certainty of a fixed future. Necessitarianism is equivalent to fatalism without any of the religious baggage.
Still the concept of necessitarianism is impractical regardless of whether it’s true which is kind of weird.
Why judge OBL, Bush, Tea party’ers, someone as a liar, people who cheat on their spouses. Anybody really.
If that is the ideology you are trying for, just invite them all over for coffee and donuts. They had no more choice in their actions then you in being a “good” guy. If I kill you, beat your wife and dog, hey it was all necessary.
If you were to forgive me, there’s no reason to acknowledge you did anything. My forgiveness was necessitated by how the big bang banged.
Whether it’s true or not, the ideology of necessitarianism seems dangerous. Perhaps as dangerous as the Christian Hell?
Let us, well at least I will continue to hope it is not true.