Freedom of Choice: DECARTES v. NIETZSCHE
- Sophie Pierce
- Nov 5, 2025
- 4 min read
In this drive into the philosophical concept of freedom of choice, the two polar opposite belief systems of Rene Decartes and Fredrick Nietzsche will be examined and left to readers final conclusions.
Rene Decartes
Roman Catholic
French philosopher 15th and 16th century.
Believed in absolute freedom of God's act of creation
Rationalist, Dualist, Father of Modern Philosophy
Fredrick Nietzsche
German philosopher 1800-1900
Classical Philologist
Study of languages latin
Existentialism, Nihilism, Perspectivism, and Postmodernism
Beginning with Rene Decartes, this philosopher believed in creationism or the religious belief that nature, and aspects such as the universe, Earth, life, and humans, originated with supernatural acts of divine creation.
Descartes believed that reason alone could lead to knowledge of eternal truths, and that innate ideas of mind, matter, and God existed.
Descartes also believed that the human soul was an immaterial substance with an essence, while all other earthly substances were material
Descartes' philosophy is often seen as a bridge between realism and idealism. He argued that we can be sure of our own existence, but also that God and the material world exist.
Descartes laid the groundwork for debates developed during the Enlightenment.
Descartes' other ideas include
Mechanistic and empiricist physics and physiology based on sensory experience
Extreme moral optimism, believing that understanding the good leads to a desire to do the good heavily influenced by the teaching of St. Augustine
He condemned Aristotelian biology and hoped his writings would take precent in the Church.
The condemnation of Aristotle's take on biology is one of my favorite things about Decartes. He is a man of philosophy, science, and religion.
"Free will, according to Descartes, is the sign of God in human nature, and human beings can be praised or blamed according to their use of it.
People are good, he believed, only to the extent that they act freely for the good of others; such generosity is the highest virtue.
Descartes was Epicurean in his assertion that human passions are good in themselves. He was an extreme moral optimist in his belief that understanding of the good is automatically followed by a desire to do the good.
Moreover, because passions are “willings” according to Descartes, to want something is the same as to will it. Descartes was also stoic, however, in his admonition that, rather than change the world, human beings should control their passions."
Thus, he said, instead of continuing to hope for long life, he had found an easier way, namely to love life and not to fear death. It is easy, he claimed, for a true philosopher to die tranquilly.
"Descartes takes the operation of the will to be integral to both belief and action.
In general, the will, or “freedom of choice,” consists “in our ability to do or not do something (that is, to affirm or deny, to pursue or avoid); or rather, it consists simply in the fact that when the intellect puts something forward for affirmation or denial or for pursuit or avoidance, our inclinations are such that we do not feel we are determined by any external force” (AT VII 57/CSM II 40).
For Descartes, freedom is an essential property of the will; however, this freedom does not entail indifference:
“if I always saw clearly what was true and good, I should never have to deliberate about the right judgement or choice; in that case, although I should be wholly free, it would be impossible for me ever to be in a state of indifference” (AT VII 58/CSM II 40). We are indifferent only when our perception of the true, or of the good, is less than clear and distinct."
Basically, we have the choice to deliberate therefore we have freewill with the absence of indifference.
Moving onto Fredrick Neitzsche; this philosopher is known for questioning the basis of good and evil, criticizing traditional European morality, and his ideas about the end of religion.
Neitzsche believed free will to be a concept used to create guilt and control people. He argued our choices are shaped by biology. culture. and physiological drives.
Nietzsche's critique of free will;
He saw the concept of free will as a theological invention to make individuals morally responsible for their actions, which then justifies the use of guilt, punishment, and reward.
Nietzsche believed the psyche is a "social system of multiple 'undersouls'" with competing drives. An act of "willing" is the result of a higher nature commanding a lower one, not a single, sovereign "I" making a free choice.
He argued that the idea of being one's own cause (causa sui), which is essential to traditional free will, is a form of "crass stupidity" because no one can pull themselves out of nothingness by their own hair.
Nietzsche proposed a middle way between total free will and total determinism. He saw human behavior as conditioned, but the critical factor is one's attitude toward these conditions.
He offers an alternative perspective.
Instead of focusing on whether one can choose their path, Nietzsche proposes the idea of loving your fate —accepting and embracing everything that has happened and will happen.
He argued that accepting the things you cannot change, like your introverted personality or your past, can actually be empowering. This acceptance allows you to live more forcefully and authentically rather than being burdened by guilt over not being different.
He distinguished between strong and weak wills, suggesting that the "unfreedom of the will" is a concept used by the weak to avoid responsibility. The strong will, by contrast, accepts its condition and lives in accordance with its nature.
These two philosophers could not have starkly differing views on the concept of free will and yet each carry merit and certainly food for thought.
Different situations call for different perspectives. Even though they are in direct opposition to eachother, sometimes Nietzsche makes a whole lot of sense and sometimes it's Decartes. Comparing and contrasting belief systems stimulates intellectual flexibly and its fun.
Enjoy the exploration.
Comments