Determinism vs. Dependent Origination

[quote]Are you clear here that there is no guiding?[/quote]

Everything is guided but no guider.

Or,  nothing is guided, because guiding implies that things can happen differently than they do if not for the guidance. Is a flower guided toward the sun? What guides it? The sun? DNA? We could say, yes, the sun and DNA guide the flower's growth. Or we could say that the growth is inseparable from its conditions, there's no split in reality. 

Determinism to most people implies causation, which implies causes separate from results. Dependent origination shows that there are causes & conditions, but those causes & conditions are not separate from the things they influence. In a sense, they *are* those things. Only by later designating one thing to be a condition, and another thing to be a result, can we split reality up into linear time and subject/object consciousness. 

My understanding of dependent origination is that of maybe a first-grader in public school. If you want a scholarly understanding, I suggest you read Nagarjuna. However, Nagarjuna is not just a scholar but also aims at breaking the mind almost koan-like. So logicians would probably not agree with much of what he is saying.

I did recently read a book which is highly revered by some folks as explaining the difference between determinism and the teaching of dependent origination from the Pali canon, but I found it lacking. Here's my review: http://www.amazon.com/gp/review/R3TPBIEVR53KWN