Destiny is defined as the predetermined future. There are events that are bound to happen. Physics tells us very clearly that this is necessarily the case. It even seems that there cannot be such a thing as free will because everything is preordained. However, in the personal world defined by QBism the situation is radically different. There is a destiny, but it is not fixed. In this kind of personal world, defined solely by the record of observations made, the destiny is defined solely by this structure of information. And it changes with each observation made. Crucially, when this process is biased or modified, this influences which version of the future one is likely to experience. Effectively, in this personal world, these changes alter the destiny of the world, with respect to everything.
Interactive destiny means that, in effect, one is able to influence what is likely to happen in reality. In fact, of course, in objective physical reality, such a thing is quite literally, completely impossible. There is absolutely no way you can determine which version of physical reality is likely to happen. But effectively, in a personal reality as defined by QBism, this is how the world works. This is interactive destiny.
The consequences are totally extraordinary but the mechanism is quite simple. When experience clashes with expectation, there tends to be a particular type of discomfort; things aren’t right! In psychology this discomfort is called dissonance. Because of this, the mind will often modify the experience, so as to reduce or eliminate this unpleasant feeling of dissonance. This is called dissonance reduction. The unconscious mind modifies the observation in order to avoid this bad feeling. The observation is thereby biased, meaning it is modified so it fits better with the expectations. The process of reporting the sensory data to produce the world hologram is biased, distorting the observation. As a result the expectation is confirmed. This is confirmation bias.
Obviously enough, given objective reality, we are just distorting what is reported by the senses, building a rose-tinted view of the world, thinking things turned out how we expected. But in the kind of personal world QBism shows us we are actually living in, the situation is very different; and the implications of confirmation bias are truly astonishing. It is the biased observations that become part of the definition of the real world. So rather than just deluding ourselves, we are unconsciously causing a jump into a slightly different version of reality. As Saibal Mitra (2008) explains in technical detail, the alteration of an observation causes one to exist in a different version of the world, a parallel version of reality.
Of course, this sounds all wrong. Rather obviously, you cannot change the real physical world just by wishful thinking. This is absolutely true, but that is not what happens. What happens is you take a different path into the future. As described in Logical Types the logic of how the real world works is like a movie. Just as all the frames of a movie exist, laid out along the movie film, every possible moment in physical reality exists, laid out along the time dimension of space-time. The experience of moment after moment is the experience of your quantum mechanical frame of reference moving from moment to moment. As each observation is made, you move to a new and slightly different version of the world, one in which the events one observed have just happened.
The technical definition of the quantum mechanical frame of reference is given here.
The universe is logically more complicated than the movie. Which moment will come next is not definite. At any given moment, there are many different, possible next moments. So the universe is like a movie with multiple choice at every moment. When bias confirmation causes you to make a different version of an observation, you wind up in a different version of the next moment in physical reality. It switches which version of the next moment you come to, and thus which version of the real physical world you are headed toward in the future.
Obviously none of this alters physical reality. The world itself is the same as before. It is just that you come to live in a slightly different version of the world. As Hugh Everett emphasises:
… it is not so much the system which is affected by an observation as the observer, who becomes correlated to the system. (1973, 116)
The correlations define which version of the world you are in. And with each observation made, each new correlation made, you live in a slightly different version of the world – one in which the events observed have just happened, as described in Logical Types.
Expectations induce confirmation bias, and this induces bias into this process, and thus which version of the world you get to. So this is very important. Destiny is the inevitable future, the future defined by the way things are in the world. But in the personal reality defined by QBism, bias on observations effectively leads to bias on the way things turn out in the world. So what we call destiny is not in fact fixed. Unknowingly, we are constantly interacting with the destiny of the world. There is no such thing as interactive destiny in physical reality. This much is clear. This is why ideas like the law of attraction are considered deluded and credulous rubbish. However, on the inside view of reality, this is a real phenomenon.
As long as you have positive and optimistic expectations, this interacting with destiny is working in your favour. However, if there is something you really do not want to have happen in your life but are nonetheless expecting, confirmation bias means you are increasingly likely to experience it taking place. Not good. What is more, studies have shown that we tend to be natural worriers, meaning we have a greater tendency to formulate negative expectations of significant events than positive ones. Now we know, this is very counter-productive. But once you know about all this you can be sure to practise positive thinking, focusing on what you want, and expecting the best. The trick is to expect the best for the future, regardless of what may have been observed up until now, as this allows confirmation bias full rein. Then events get biased toward the best outcomes, and things go better. The whole mechanism can be put to use deliberately using creative visualisation, as explained in Strange Attractors. The further implication is that the principle effect of karma is a real phenomenon as described in Quantum Karma. This is not the effect of any kind of payback from the world. It is simply the effect of interactive destiny.