We are all born with an innate drive for freedom, a desire to be the authors of our own lives. This quest for self-direction is the bedrock of a meaningful existence, the engine of human progress and achievement. Yet, we live in a world of intricate rules, powerful institutions, and the unpredictable actions of others. This raises a fundamental question: In the practical reality of our daily lives, how much of our will is truly free, and how much is determined by forces beyond our control? The answer lies in understanding the two distinct realms of freedom—the internal and the external.
At its core, free will can be split into two domains. The first is internal: the freedom of the mind. This is our capacity to think, to choose our values, to form our own judgments, and to decide what attitude we will adopt in any given situation. The second is external: our ability to act on those choices in the physical world, to pursue our goals, and to direct the course of our lives without coercive interference. While the internal realm is our sovereign territory, the external is a negotiated space, constantly influenced by the world around us.
Determinism is the philosophical view that every event, including human cognition and behavior, is the inevitable result of prior causes. It posits that the future is fixed by the past, effectively denying the existence of genuine free will.
The most powerful external determinant of our actions is the need for safety. When our fundamental security—be it physical, financial, or emotional—is genuinely threatened, our focus narrows dramatically. The grand, self-directed plans we may have for our lives are put on hold, superseded by the urgent, non-negotiable demands of survival. A person’s long-term goal of starting a business becomes irrelevant the moment they face eviction; their pursuit of knowledge is sidelined by the need to find their next meal. In these moments, the threat itself determines our course. We are no longer steering; we are reacting.
Consider the life of a dedicated professional who has spent years cultivating a career they find fulfilling. They have a clear vision for their future, built on rational choices and hard work. One day, due to an economic downturn entirely beyond their influence, their position is eliminated. Suddenly, their carefully laid plans are rendered void. Their external free will—the ability to continue their chosen path—has been overridden. Their immediate actions are now dictated not by their own long-term vision, but by the pressing need to secure new employment and maintain their stability.
The word “authority” derives from the Latin “auctoritas,” originally meaning “growth,” “influence,” and, crucially, “authorship” – referring to someone who originates or brings something into being. This etymological root reveals how attributing authority to another implies granting them the power to “author” our actions, beliefs, or even our life’s direction, essentially ceding control over our own narrative to their will or judgment.
This collision between the individual and the world is best understood as a conflict between two opposing concepts: authority and power. True authority is an internal quality. It is the right to direct, a right earned through reason, competence, and moral character. A person with authority is followed voluntarily because their judgment is trusted and their wisdom is respected. They lead by example and persuasion, not by force. Authority is the hallmark of a self-governing individual who directs their own life with principle and integrity.
Power, in stark contrast, is simply the ability to compel action. It is not inherently good or evil; it is a neutral tool whose moral character is defined by its use. The theoretical ideal is a union where legitimate power serves only to defend the rights established by a reason-based authority. In this form, it is a defensive force for justice. However, when power is divorced from authority, it degenerates into raw coercion. It no longer needs consent or respect; it simply demands compliance through the threat of negative consequences.
The truly self-governing individual, who has cultivated their internal authority, can be likened to a grandmaster of chess. They think strategically, operate on a consistent set of rational principles, and understand the cause-and-effect nature of their actions. However, they are often forced to play on a field with those who wield coercive power—a game of Calvinball where the rules are made up on the fly and enforced by might. No matter how brilliant the chess player’s strategy, it can be instantly nullified when the other player simply knocks the board over.
This dynamic is not only imposed from the top down by institutions; it also rises from the bottom up. The free will of a self-governing individual is further threatened by the lowest common denominator—those who lack the emotional and intellectual capacity for self-responsibility. Unable to govern their own impulses or navigate reality through reason, they create social chaos and demand external control. Their poor choices and lack of foresight lead to calls for more rules, more regulations, and more interventions to save them from themselves. Inevitably, the systems built to manage the irresponsible are imposed upon everyone, shackling the competent to the standards of the incompetent. The self-reliant individual is thus forced to live by a script written for those who cannot think for themselves.
This tension is further clarified by understanding two opposing philosophies of law. The first, negative law, is the essential guardian of external free will. It is based on the principle of non-aggression: “Thou shalt not…” It forbids actions that harm others or infringe upon their rights, such as theft, assault, and fraud. This framework creates a wide, open field for individual action, as anything not explicitly forbidden is permitted. Its purpose is to build fences between people, not cages, ensuring that one person’s freedom does not become another’s burden.
Positive law, however, operates on mandates: “Thou shalt…” These are commands compelling citizens to perform specific actions. While negative law liberates, positive law obligates. In modern society, the balance has been catastrophically skewed. The relentless proliferation of positive laws—in taxation, regulation, licensing, and mandates—has created a suffocating web that chokes the open field of negative law. For every “thou shalt not harm,” there are now a thousand “thou shalt comply.” This inversion effectively removes practical free will, replacing a presumption of liberty with a presumption of subservience to the collective.
In a world governed by such systems, our external free will is not merely compromised; it is subjected to a constant, grinding erosion. The individual is forced into a defensive posture, spending invaluable time, energy, and resources not on building their chosen future, but on navigating a labyrinth of mandates and permissions they had no hand in creating. Life becomes less a product of deliberate, forward-looking design and more a series of reactive adaptations to external pressures, turning the sovereign author of one’s life into a mere editor of circumstances.
This reality reduces much of what we call “free will” to an illusion in the practical, external world. The freedom to choose our hair color, the furniture in our homes, or the entertainment we consume are superficial choices—bandaids that distract from the fundamental lack of control over our own security. Without a baseline guarantee of safety and freedom from coercive interference, we are merely playing house. True external freedom is the power to chart the fundamental course of one’s life. When that course can be unilaterally upended by the actions of a landlord, an employer, or a government, our perceived autonomy is revealed to be a fragile privilege, not an inalienable right.
Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way. ~Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning
Does this, then, mean we are merely puppets of determinism, our strings pulled by the hands of circumstance? Not entirely. Here we find the profound refuge described by psychologist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl. He realized that even when stripped of every possession, dignity, and external freedom, one thing could never be taken away: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances. This is not a minor consolation prize; it is the ultimate assertion of the self. External forces can dictate the conditions of our existence, but they cannot command our judgment, our integrity, or our response. This is the unconquerable territory of the mind, the true seat of our liberty.
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves. ~Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning
Ultimately, our practical freedom on this earth is a matter of degrees. The external world, with its structures of coercive power, will attempt to impose ever more constraints. It will threaten our safety, derail our plans, and demand our compliance. However, the ultimate battleground for freedom is not in the world, but in the mind. While external forces may determine what happens to us, we retain the sovereign authority to determine what happens within us. Cultivating the internal character traits of a rational, principled, and self-governing individual is the highest form of liberty—an inner citadel that no external power can ever truly conquer.
Did you enjoy the article? Show your appreciation and buy me a coffee:
Bitcoin: bc1qmevs7evjxx2f3asapytt8jv8vt0et5q0tkct32
Doge: DBLkU7R4fd9VsMKimi7X8EtMnDJPUdnWrZ
XRP: r4pwVyTu2UwpcM7ZXavt98AgFXRLre52aj
MATIC: 0xEf62e7C4Eaf72504de70f28CDf43D1b382c8263F
THE UNITY PROCESS: I’ve created an integrative methodology called the Unity Process, which combines the philosophy of Natural Law, the Trivium Method, Socratic Questioning, Jungian shadow work, and Meridian Tapping—into an easy to use system that allows people to process their emotional upsets, work through trauma, correct poor thinking, discover meaning, set healthy boundaries, refine their viewpoints, and to achieve a positive focus. You can give it a try by contacting me for a private session.
