All Commentary
Wednesday, June 1, 1960

Free Will: The Foundation of the Free World

Dr. Schlichting is an Independent Research Biologist at Port Sanilac, Michigan.


The free way of life rests upon the conviction that men are freely willing creatures with the capacity to choose between alternatives. Freedom of the will is man’s pri­mordial liberty, the fountainhead from which every other freedom stems. The free way of life is not simply the absence of arbitrary, external controls—the absence of outside bondage reflects and im­plements man’s inner liberty. We favor the free society because every variety of totalitarian order violates the demands of man’s na­ture. But if free will is an illusion, as many contemporary philoso­phers assert, we cannot complain about the massive denial of free choice which is a collectivist so­ciety. Totalitarianism is the end result of the denial of inner lib­erty, however much determinists may disavow this ultimate conse­quence of their position.

The question of determinism or free will is a philosophical matter, but determinists frequently base their case on what they regard as the scientific method.

A distinguished British scien­tist, the late Sir F. S. Taylor, states the position as follows: “Science finds no evidence of free will in matter and energy…. Matter and energy, however or­ganized, have no free will. So, if man consists of nothing else than matter and energy, then man has no free will. The materialist, like everyone else, has the experience of free will and acts as if he were free, for no one could live without doing so; but he regards this sensation of free will as an illu­sion.”1 Thus we are not really free; we only think we are!

According to Freud, “No act is uncaused and the illusion of free will simply comes from the fact that some of our motives are un­conscious.”2

Dr. E. G. Boring of Harvard University goes further, saying that “freedom, when you believe it is operating, always resides in an area of ignorance. If there is a known law, you do not have free­dom…. Both freedom and chance are terms that are used when effi­cient causes of present events are not known and often appear un­knowable.”3 This is another way of saying that our concept of free will is due to our ignorance! He adds that belief in human free­dom is merely “a useful supersti­tion” but concludes “to get rid of this concept would change the whole of our civilization.” Obviously, the despots of today, as of yesterday, are attempting to annihilate the concept of free will. If the basic pillars of our civiliza­tion can be shaken, their hope is that the house will crumble. In fact, denial of free will has been the basis for all totalitarian sys­tems and their power over men!
The arguments against free will may be grouped into the following major categories


1. All of our actions are deter­mined by our body chemistry and interrelated past experi­ences; they are determined ac­cording to the laws of physics and chemistry.

2. No act is uncaused and free will is an illusion.

3. The belief in free will is due to ignorance of antecedent causes.

4. The question of free will vs. determinism is unanswerable.

Morality Depends on Choice


It would require a book to ex­plore all of the consequences of these propositions. However, three of these seem most apparent to me. First, for people living by the Judeo-Christian concept of life, free will is essential. The disobe­dience of the first man to God and its consequences presupposes free will.

An outstanding American gene­ticist, Dr. T. Dobzhansky, made the following comments: “Ants and termites are neither heroes when they defend their own nests, nor villains when they rob those of their neighbors. They are de­void of virtues and vices because they lack the freedom to decide between possible alternative courses of action…. Insect be­havior is, then, not reducible to a common ethical measure with human actions. Praise and blame have meaning only in connection with acts in which the individual is at least to some extent a free agent…. Moral rightness or wrongness have meaning only in connection with persons who are free agents, and who are con­sequently able to choose between different ideas and between possi­ble courses of action. Ethics pre­supposes freedom…. Ethics, as such, have no genetic basis and are not the product of biological evolution.”4 Thus for the deter­minists who base their philosophy upon genetics and evolution, there actually is no ethical system for them to adopt!

Second, our entire judicial sys­tem is premised upon the exist­ence of free will; man is presumed responsible for his actions. There could be no moral law and order without it. The act of justice is to give each man his due and is preceded by an act whereby some­thing becomes his due. Therefore, one’s right must precede justice! As Josef Pieper, a noted philoso­pher, has stated, “We cannot state the basis of a Right and hence a judicial obligation, unless we have a concept of man, of human nature. “5 If in truth there is no distinctly human nature, then there can be no human rights or justice. This is the formal justifi­cation for every exercise of totali­tarian power. The existence of free will is essential to this con­cept of human nature upon which our justice is based.

Third, there could be no virtue because virtue is a state of char­acter concerned with choice. If the latter is taken away, there is no way for goodness to assert it­self.

Judeo-Christian Foundations


These three, Judeo-Christian be­lief, justice, and virtue, are all interrelated in our western civili­zation. They are the basis for our civilization, and it is obvious that our way of life, as we have known it, cannot exist if we accept the teaching of those who contend that there is no free will.

This is not a one-sided argu­ment. Contrary to many modern teachings, the concept of free will is supported by numerous philoso­phers. Unfortunately, most of them are dead! It is auspicious, however, that their ideas “live” on. Even though ignored or de­famed, the materialists have not succeeded in destroying them.

The question of freedom is one of the most difficult, most reward­ing, and most pressing in meta­physics. For a thinker of the stature of Descartes it was free will alone or liberty of choice which he declared to be so great an idea that he could conceive no other to be superior.

“Free Will” Defined


What do we mean by free will? We may use Webster’s definition as a starting point: “Free will: Unhampered or uncoerced choice. The doctrine that human beings are not controlled in their choices by physically or divinely imposed necessity.” Free will cannot, of course, be expressed under coer­cion or irrationality by its very definition.

To concede that the free will question is unanswerable, is really not to confront the problem at all. For one meets problems and must make decisions throughout his en­tire life; to do otherwise would be to merely vegetate! It would be extremely inconsistent if a person lives part of the time as if he were truly free and at other times as if he were not free at all.

To state that no act is uncaused and that therefore free will is an illusion is to misunderstand the free will position. The proponents of free will do not claim that their actions are uncaused but that the individual causes them from within. Indeterminism is the un­tenable view that events are not caused. Advocates of free will are not materialistic determinists:they believe that the laws of chem­istry and physics do not apply to the will and intellect—these being nonmaterial entities.

Those who would have us be­lieve that free will is due only to our ignorance are merely stating that in the final analysis it is an illusion. Some men are more ig­norant than others and this ignor­ance in a sense makes them less free. This fact, however, does not nullify the concept of free will.

Dr. Etienne Gilson, a scholastic philosopher, proposes that man is both free and determined, i.e., man is free to choose the means to the end but is not free to choose the end itself. In “choosing the means to the end,” Gilson writes, “the choice is free beyond all doubt. Man indeed does not choose his end; necessarily he wants to be happy merely on account of his nature as man; but various routes to happiness lie open, and he is free to choose what seems to him the best for the purpose.”6 Human happiness is the determined end for all men because of their very nature; man cannot will to be un­happy! All particular decisions are directed toward this end. Since choice is not concerned with the end but with the means to it, man does not choose of necessity but freely. Free will implies the power to choose a good or poor means to an end depending on the ration­ality of the individual and his de­sires for what he believes will bring happiness. He may choose any of a multitude of possibilities for obtaining his happiness.

The Responsible Individual


The truth of free will can only be discovered and proven within ourselves! Why did I choose to do a certain act? I chose it as a means to some end which may be called the attainment of my hap­piness. Thus, I am self-directing and I believe it because there is no conclusive evidence to the con­trary.

Frank Chodorov in his “Free Will and the Marketplace” (THE FREEMAN, January 1959) stated: “Many persons who would abolish free choice in the market place, logically conclude that man is not endowed with free will, that free will is a fiction, that man is merely a product of his environment. This premise ineluctably leads them to denial of the soul and, of course, the denial of God.” Every truly great man has risen above his en­vironment! He not merely comes from it, as a part, but he adds to it. Society has its impact on man but it must also be remembered that men have their impact on society. Actually, they make it what it is! This fact is forgotten in this age of socialization.

Body chemistry and our past experiences are certainly impor­tant in influencing our choice of action. They allow for our selec­tion of alternatives but they do not determine them. Our past ex­periences and bodily chemistry “set the stage” for the operation of our intellect and will to make a choice from genuine alternatives of action. However, the intellect and will are “actors” which do not have to follow the script! Our be­havior in carrying out some action we have decided upon as a means to achieve our end, is subject to physical-chemical laws, biological coordination, and our reason. Be­cause a series of choices in your past influences your present choice, one cannot say that you were determined to choose as you did due to your past experiences. It has not been proven that your past experiences are determined. This materialistic determinism is only an assumption of those who do not believe in free will.

Injection of “truth serum” and physical violence can narrow the alternatives between which a choice is possible. But one is still free to go counter to this coercion even until irrationality or uncon­sciousness results. As the martyrs of history have shown, men, in fact, have resisted these forces and have given up their lives rather than to select the alterna­tive choice. By their very suffering and death support is given to the concept that man has free will. Chemical, physical, and psycho­logical forces do not rob man of his free will. When one does sub­mit to force of any kind, it does not mean that he does not have free will but that the freedom of action is denied to him!

Some would claim the martyrs could not have done otherwise, that they had to suffer and die be­cause of their past experiences. It is easy and natural to choose non-suffering but very difficult and in­deed against our materialistic na­ture to choose suffering. The mate­rialist, logically, could not be an intentional martyr. Certainly, there have been no martyrs for the stand against man’s freedom!

Material and Spiritual


For most of us man has both a material and a spiritual nature fused into one being. Man’s spir­itual nature is not physically de­termined; man develops his moral nature based upon both the mate­rial and the spiritual aspects. The spiritual aspect can be demon­strated to exist empirically by the very behavior of men themselves. For example, the Gene Theory is important in biology because it explains, in part, the transmission of traits passed from parents to offspring. The truth of this theory is based upon its empirical verifi­cation and its predictive value. Similarly, the Judeo-Christian concept of life is important be­cause it explains, in part, the whole nature of man, his origin, and destiny. The truth of this concept is based upon empirical verifica­tion (i.e., behavior) and its pre­dictive value for man in attaining happiness. Both the Gene Theory and the Judeo-Christian concept of life go beyond empiricism itself to an over-all explanation of real­ity. Some scientists accept the first but reject the second proposition!

In his explanation of man the materialist reduces man to one as­pect of his nature, and then uses this part in his attempt to explain the whole. As far as most thought­ful persons are concerned materi­alism has not been successful in explaining man. In fact, they have not as yet given a satisfactory ex­planation of the basic tenet of their belief, namely, matter.

Overcoming Adversities


Human freedom does not mean that we can do anything we wish; it means that we can do some things we wish, and it is very im­portant to know what those things are. Free will can be limited only in the carrying out of actions; there being no thought control as yet in the free world, as set forth in Orwell’s 1984. Of course, there are some events which happen to us through no choice of our own. These may be due to natural ca­tastrophies or the decisions of others. Our birth and usually our death are not of our own free choosing; yet their occurrence does not invalidate our concept of free will. The following may limit our free actions:

1. Our native intelligence, which is hereditary.

2. Our total experiences in life, which are environmental and fall into three main restrictions:

a. Faulty education

b. Socialism (where human re­lationships are coerced)

c. Poverty (If the essentials nec­essary to sustain life are lack­ing, our behavior is influ­enced but not determined)

Nevertheless, our free will still operates even under the most ad­verse conditions. The act of free choice is an act of both the will and intellect. The acknowledgment of these nonmaterial entities is es­sential to our free way of life. Ac­cording to Gilson, “wherever there is intelligence there is free will; and the more intelligence there is by so much is there more liberty.” Perhaps an explanation as to why some persons do not believe in free will is implied in the preceding quotation.

Much more has been and can be written on the concept of free will and its importance to our way of life. It is one of those fundamental truths which must constantly be pondered anew, lest inferior and even untrue propositions replace them. It is up to each individual in the free world to safeguard these truths upon which our free­dom is based.



1 Taylor, F. S., The Fourfold Vision. London: Chapman and Hall, Ltd., 1946. p. 58.

2 McClelland, D. C. “Freud and Hull: Pioneers in Scientific Psychology,” American Scientist, 45:101-13. 1957.

3 Boring, E. G. “When Is Human Be­havior Predetermined?” The Scientific Monthly. pp. 189-196. April 1957.

4 Dobzhansky, T. The Biological Basis of Human Freedom. New York: Colum­bia University Press, 1956. pp. 93-94,132.

5 Pieper, J. Justice. New York: Pan­theon Books, 1955. pp. 1-24.

6 Gilson, Etienne. The Spirit of Mediaeval Philosophy. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1940. pp. 319-321.




Ideas on



The Importance of Virtue


It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and… great Nation to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a People always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence…. Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felic­ity of a Nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is rec­ommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?