It seems to me that people see fate where they want to see it and ignore it where they don't. Does that make fate a human construct? It often seems that fate which is obvious, blatant, to the outside world leaves the victim (?) ignorant. However, the same "experiencer of fate" often chooses to see the signs of fate where they are in reality, absent. Example? The darling boy in your biology class uses the same chapstick that you do, you take this as fate: you're meant to be together. You interpret it as fate, because that's what you want it to be. But what if something that is unfavorable appears in the form of fate? It is dismissed as coincidence. I suppose then, a person's belief in fate is conditional, entirely dependent on their own will. I simply worry that this conditional belief in a non-conditional principle isn't constricted to the idea of fate alone. Too often, we are conditional believers, the conditions for change being our satisfaction, our desires. What, then, remains? I'm not certain there's an answer. But, many of the principles are like gravity: your belief and/or lack of belief has no effect on the nature of the principle, it will never change its validity. Whether you believe in gravity or not, its existence is indisputable. What are we needlessly denying?

P.s. Just something to think on, for what its worth... A quote from C.S. Lewis from his years of atheism, "I don't believe in God, but I am mad at him." Take it or leave it.