Does free will exist? It is truly amazing how questions such as this one, the type that philosophers have pondered for millenia, get dismissed away by most people in only a few sentences, as if they had to swat away a fly in order to get back to more serious matters. 1 Fundamental questions of philosophy such as this one can never be given a literal answer, because the 'ground' of Reality is not literal, but we can still gesture at the truth.
There are two levels at which we could talk of freedom: the self, and the conscious I. Self, by itself, can never be free, though many selves tend to repudiate this idea because self likes to see itself as an agentic being guided by its own autonomy (including the autonomy to worship God), an idea which manifests itself in two different forms, one for the right-wing which we could call the 'domineering' form of freedom, the freedom to impose your will on the world and other people, and one for the left-wing which we could call the 'self-defining' form of freedom, the ability to choose your identity, who you surround yourself with, what you do with your life, and even, in the most decadent forms of the left, your own gender and the sex of your own body.
The problem is that neither of those self-bound forms of freedom allows the self to address its fundamental problems, such as its existential fear, which is why domineering selves are never satisfied with how much power and safety they have, because none of those worldly achievements do anything about its own mortality, or its inability to love anyone or anything, which is why domineering selves do not even think about love to begin with, and self-defining selves prefer to focus entirely on themselves, retreating to their solipsistic cell which keeps the other at bay, or its tendency to get hooked on addictions, something which is very prevalent with the left-wing, but which the right-wing deals through denial and suppression, in a manner that constantly requires vigilance, effort, and often leads to relapses as a result, and even the fundamental problem that self does not know what to do with its time!
The right-wing emphasizes structure and literal forms of achievement—earning money is the easy example, but fitting inside a religion is also a literal endeavor, within a literal institution which fosters literal beliefs—and the left-wing emphasizes a soppy 'do what you love' attitude, but neither allow the self to experience true freedom, because self is precisely the enemy.
Only the conscious I is free, in the sense that it is not conditioned by the self-informed drive to perpetuate itself, and can experience the mystery (and other qualities) of the moment as it is, and act spontaneously on it, which is why only conscious people can meaningfully change, especially when it comes to addictions, whereas unconscious selves are left rearranging their addictions, avoidance mechanisms, control strategies and anxieties on a sinking ship.
But here we run into an interesting paradox: I am free, but what I truly long for is to devote myself to something higher, a lover, a family, a community, my calling, or even God. Freedom is thus freedom of devotion. This is similar to the mysterious union of two opposite forces that we find in great stories, between the freedom and individuality of character, and the fatefulness of plot. A great ending is both surprising, colored by the individuality of its characters and the author, but also totally expected in a sense, in that it couldn't have been otherwise, an ending which is in harmony with fate. 2
This paradox between conscious freedom and devotion cannot be reduced to a literal explanation, because literal language is dualistic and consistent, i.e. something is either this or not-this, it cannot inhabit a paradoxical state of being both at the same time, which is why great stories are so valuable, because they go beyond literal language, and allow us to experience both the idiosyncracies of a character, and all the choices that they make and which forge their life, as well as the set of circumstances which are beyond their control, but which nonetheless steer the course of their life, in a single, united whole.
Only life is free, not our idea of it, which is why advice is so often useless, because advice so often boils down to mere ideas, instead of being the spark that lights up the fire in us, and compels us to do the right thing.
1 Or as Darren Allen says in one of his Substack notes "Questions which have puzzled men and women for millennia, are disposed of like chewing gum."
2 Another great frame from the man Darren Allen. See for instance his discussion on video games (and why they are not art), or why read great literature for more discussions on art.
Go back to the list of blog posts
2026-06-20