Do we have free will or are we destined to our fate? Do the Stoics believe that we have free will or are our lives pre-determined? Does is matter? Today I’m going to talk about the Stoic ideas behind free will and fate, and how it does or doesn’t impact our lives.
“Lead me, Fate, wherever you will, and I will cheerfully follow. For even if I kick and wail, all the same I must follow.” —Cleanthes
So a few weeks ago I got a request on YouTube to create an episode discussing free will. From even the early days of philosophy there remains one of the oldest and thorniest questions: do we have free will or is life simply deterministic and we are ruled by fate?
As philosophers, the Stoics certainly had some ideas on whether we are slaves of fate, doomed by deterministic forces, or if we actually have free will. And while it feels like fate and free will are binary options—either we have freewill or we don’t, the Stoics had a more nuanced approach.
Now some people might wonder why this even matters. If we have free will then the choices we make are our own. If we only have the illusion of free will, isn’t that good enough? But I think understanding this does actually influence how we make choices and how we can change behaviors in our lives.
At first glance, Stoicism might seem deterministic—after all, the Stoics believed in fate (heimarmenē in Greek): the idea that the universe unfolds according to a rational and necessary order, governed by logos (universal reason or divine intelligence). But they also held that human beings possess free will—or more accurately, the capacity for prohairesis (rational choice or moral volition).
Let’s unpack both ideas and how the Stoics reconcile them.
Fate: The Cosmic Order
The Stoics believed that:
• Everything in the universe happens according to logos, the rational principle that structures all things.
• Fate is the total chain of causes—the idea that everything has a cause, and those causes are interlinked in a seamless web of necessity.
• Nothing happens “by chance”; everything unfolds as it must, based on prior causes.
Chrysippus, a key Stoic thinker, said:
“Everything that happens is followed by something else which depends on it by causal necessity. Likewise, everything that happens is preceded by something with which it is causally connected.”
So yes, the Stoics are determinists in the cosmic sense.
Free Will: Prohairesis (Moral Choice)
But within this deterministic universe, the Stoics argued that our judgments, choices, and responses are up to us. This is prohairesis (moral choice), our rationality that allows us to:
• Give or withhold assent to impressions.
• Choose how we interpret and respond to events.
• Live in accordance with nature—meaning, live rationally and virtuously.
Epictetus says:
“Some things are up to us and some things are not.”
The only thing truly up to us is how we use our rational faculty—our judgments and choices.
How Do They Reconcile the Two?
This is where it gets deep. The Stoic saw no contradiction between fate and free will. Instead, they believed in the compatibility of these two forces:
• Fate determines the circumstances.
• Free will determines our responses.
Here’s an analogy that might explain it a little easier:
You’re playing a video game. The game’s programming (fate) sets the rules, obstacles, and events. But you still control the joystick—you choose your actions within the system. You’re not free from the game’s structure, but you’re free within it.
Marcus Aurelius captures this duality:
“Just that you do the right thing. The rest doesn’t matter… the choice is yours.”
Stoic View on Responsibility
This framework makes Stoicism empowering:
• You’re not a passive victim of fate.
• You have agency in how you respond.
• Your moral character is yours to shape.
Seneca reminds us:
“The wise man is not disturbed by things that go against his plan, for he has planned not to succeed, but to do what is right.”
That’s why a Stoic can be calm and active even in terrible circumstances—they trust fate but also take full responsibility for their moral choices.
Libet’s Experiments
In the 1980s, neuroscientist Benjamin Libet did a series of experiments where:
• Subjects were told to move their wrist whenever they wanted.
• They watched a clock-like device and reported the moment they first became aware of the intention to move.
• Meanwhile, electrodes (later fMRI and EEG in updated versions) measured brain activity.
The key finding was:
• Brain activity (“readiness potential”) began about 350-400 milliseconds before the person reported conscious intention.
• The conscious decision came later — about 150-200 milliseconds before the movement.
In other words, your brain “decides” before you are consciously aware of deciding. This suggested that your conscious experience of making a decision was more like being informed of a decision your brain had already made.
Later Experiments (with fMRI)
In the 2000s and 2010s, more advanced experiments using fMRI machines expanded on Libet’s work:
• Studies (like those by John-Dylan Haynes and others) showed that researchers could predict a person’s choice up to 7–10 seconds before they were aware of deciding.
• These predictions weren’t perfect (around 60–70% accuracy), but they were significantly better than chance.
In one experiment, subjects were told to press either the right or left button whenever they wished. The fMRI could detect patterns of brain activity that predicted which button they’d press before they consciously made the choice.
What Were the Conclusions?
This opened a huge debate.
One Interpretation was that free will is an illusion and that consciousness is like a narrator telling a story about decisions that have already been made subconsciously. This means that we don’t initiate actions; we only become aware of them after they’re underway.
This view is associated with thinkers like Sam Harris and many hard determinists.
The alternative interpretation (and growing consensus) is that these early brain signals may represent preparatory processes, not final decisions, and that conscious veto still seems possible — meaning, even if brain activity gears up for a choice, conscious awareness might still stop or redirect the action at the last moment. Libet himself noticed that people could consciously veto the action even after the readiness potential began. He thought this showed that while we might not start the process, we can still intervene.
Libet wrote:
“The initiation of a freely voluntary act appears to begin in the unconscious. But the conscious function still has the power to veto.”
This is sometimes called “free won’t” — the idea that you can override impulses even if you can’t stop them from arising. Conscious “choice” might happen after unconscious brain preparation, but conscious veto (stopping or changing course) still seems possible.
How This Relates to Stoicism
This is actually very Stoic. As Epictetus explains:
“Impressions striking a person's mind as soon as he perceives something within range of his senses, are not voluntary or subject to his will, they impose themselves on people's attention almost with a will of their own. But the act of assent which endorses these impressions is voluntary and a function of the human will.”
You don’t control the impressions that hit you, meaning your first reaction, but you do control whether you give assent to those impressions, meaning you have agency over your judgment and response.
In other words choice isn’t about controlling your instincts—it’s about consciously accepting, rejecting, or shaping your actions once the impulse arises. Almost like your consciousness is the quality control department, not the factory itself, and that free will might be less about pure origination of will and more about selective approval or rejection of impulses.
Critiques of Libet’s Experiments
While Libet’s findings shook up neuroscience, many researchers today argue that his conclusions were overstated. Here are the key critiques:
Readiness Potential Might Not Mean “Decision Made”
The brain activity Libet measured (the “readiness potential”) might just reflect general preparation to act, not the decision itself. In other words, the brain might be just gearing up—getting systems online—before a specific decision is finalized. Like loading a video game before you’ve even selected “Start.”
Real-World Decisions Are More Complex
Libet’s experiments tested very simple actions (flex your wrist), Whereas real decisions — like choosing a career, ending a relationship, or starting a company — involve complex reasoning, values, emotional weighting, and social context. This means that it’s unlikely that these multi-layered decisions work exactly the same way as a reflexive wrist movement.
Free will might be less about random in-the-moment button-pressing, and more about longer-term patterns of reflection, commitment, and value-driven action. That it’s a skill of consistent adjustment and self-mastery in the face of external events outside of our control.
Responsibility and Ethics: Who’s to Blame?
Here’s the tough question: If our actions are caused by prior conditions, are we morally responsible?
The Stoics say yes—because your nature is rational and social. You are responsible not because you are outside of cause and effect, but because you are aware of it. Because you can reflect. Because you can choose better next time. That’s enough to build a moral framework. That's enough to hold people accountable, not out of blame, but out of respect for their capacity to grow.
Marcus Aurelius said:
"No soul is willingly deprived of the truth."
When people do wrong, Stoics don’t react with outrage. They respond with understanding. But they still uphold justice. They still draw boundaries. They still act—just not with hatred or resentment.
Applying “Free Won’t” to Real Life (and Stoicism)
Epictetus said:
“Don’t let the force of the impression when first it hits you knock you off your feet; just say to it, ‘Hold on a moment; let me see who you are and what you represent.”
If you think of free will as “freedom to veto and shape”, then it becomes a skill — something you can cultivate. Neuroscience shows that automatic behaviors dominate when we’re not paying attention. BUT you can reprogram your “defaults” through practice. The more you practice stopping, reflecting, and choosing a better action, the more your default wiring improves over time.
Daily Practice:
So how do you train your Stoic free will? How do you build what neuroscience calls executive control?
Here’s a simple daily routine:
Morning Setup (2–5 minutes):
Reflect on likely challenges you’ll face today. Visualize your best response. This is the Stoic practice of premeditatio malorum where we imagine the challenging scenarios beforehand. The more you can make decisions before they even happen, the more likely you are to make better choices in the moment.
In-the-Moment Practice:
Stoics taught that impressions happen automatically—you can’t stop the first thought. But there’s a gap before you give assent to it, meaning you believe it or act on it. Training awareness of this gap is the most powerful self-improvement tool you have. Whenever an impulse arises—pause. Count to three. Ask: “Is this reaction useful? Is it virtuous? Is it true?”
Veto Practice:
If you find it hard to make the right choice, practice your veto power on bad choices. For example:
- Choose not to send that angry email.
- Choose not to binge another show when you’re tired.
- Choose not to quit when facing difficulty.
Sometimes it’s easier to say no to something than it is to make a conscious effort to do something.
Evening Reflection:
Journal briefly in the evening and ask yourself the following questions:
- When did you act on impulse?
- When did you pause and choose?
- What do you want to do better tomorrow?
Taking the time each evening to reflect on your choices throughout the day is helpful for not only tracking your progress, but to reenforce the wins that you have and find areas for improvement.
Bonus Practice:
Once or twice a day, delay gratification. This strengthens your prefrontal cortex, your "executive veto" system. These little moments build the muscle of Stoic free will. They sharpen your awareness. They turn unconscious habits into conscious action.
Conclusion
So where does this leave us?
The debate over free will versus fate is one that will continue to be debated long into the future. And while there are no clear answers, I’ve found that the Stoic view seems to work best for me. While you may live in a world that is shaped by fate, your freedom lies not in escaping the chain of cause and effect, but in owning your link in it. Freedom means shaping, vetoing, and steering impulses that arise naturally. You are free by exercising rational control within your constraints.
You are not the architect of the universe. But you are the architect of your response. That is enough. That is everything.
My book Stoicism 101 is available! Order here!
Find out more at https://stoic.coffee
Watch episodes on YouTube!
Find me on linkedIn, instagram, twitter, or threads.
Thanks again for listening!