Sigmund Freud was not a believer in the idea of fate and it shows in his Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis. The beginning lectures are concerned mainly with parapraxes, defined as faulty acts: mishearing, mislaying, misspeaking, misreading, misprinting, and generally seemingly innocent mistakes. Freud explains to us that these are actually very intentional of our subconscious and that there is a disturbed internal contradiction. In this case it shows that outside forces no matter situation cannot and will not change our fate, we as people will act uncontrolled of outside sources, even if it’s our unconscious acting. When discussing dreams he essentially explained that they are masked expressions of unconscious desires. He later explains interpreting; but the one thing that holds true is that if he thought the idea of fate were possible, he would not think the action of our subconscious wishes, to tell the unconscious, to implant them in the conscious upon awaking, in order to satisfy our wants, would exist. While covering neurosis he essentially explains it as a solution for the conflict of the conscious and subconscious. Although Freud makes it seem inevitable, the actions a human being makes while suffering this illness is never predetermined nor unavoidable. Sophocles, like the rest of his society whole-heartily believed in fate and it is shown clearly in his play Oedipus Tyrannus. From the play we hold two things to be self evident; that Oedipus’ fate was prophesized, and that the prophecy was self fulfilled. One may argue to that “Oedipus’ and his parent’s actions were actually what fulfilled the prophecy.” The ancient Greeks and Sophocles answer is that any actions didn’t matter. The play could have been written without Laius’ and Jocasta’s, what they thought preventative, actions that propelled his fate to fact, but by showing that no matter what