Did the Oracles of Delphi Shape the Tragedies? On the Economics of Predictive Processing

Although predicting the future is a fundamental cognitive capacity that enables humans to plan and adapt to their environment, under certain conditions it can shift from a cognitive tool to a powerful force shaping perception, emotion, behavior, and real-life outcomes. This conceptual article analytically examines the role of future-oriented predictions, expectations, and beliefs in the formation of self-fulfilling cycles, anxiety, and psychosomatic consequences. Drawing on the concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy, predictive processing theory, the free-energy principle, and research on confirmation bias, the article argues that humans do not merely predict the future; through attention, interpretation, and action, they may actively help construct the futures they anticipate. When a threatening prediction is accepted with excessive certainty, it can narrow the range of perceived possibilities and organize perception, physiological responses, and protective behaviors around that anticipated outcome. In the domain of mental health and medicine, this process becomes evident through heightened health anxiety, increased attention to bodily sensations, nocebo responses, and the amplification of psychosomatic distress. The article emphasizes that the central challenge is not eliminating prediction and foresight, but developing flexible anticipation, calibrating certainty appropriately, and staying open to revising future assumptions. Predictions should therefore be understood as probabilistic hypotheses rather than fixed verdicts, incorporating evidence, limitations, and constructive pathways for action. This perspective provides a novel framework for understanding the relationship between future-oriented cognition, anxiety, human behavior, and mental health in an era increasingly shaped by predictive technologies and continuous information flows. Importantly, this article presents a theoretical synthesis rather than an empirical model, and its proposed relationships should be understood as conceptual pathways that require further experimental and clinical investigation.