A Meditation on Will and Destiny

Each man’s destiny is as large as the world he inhabits.

—Cormac McCarthy¹

Introduction 🔗

The following is a brief meditation on will and destiny, and how they appear to relate within a causal world. These reflections are not intended as a systematic doctrine, but as an attempt at articulating recurring thoughts. Here’s the outline of my reasoning:

1. Reality is largely causal.
2. Humans are embedded within causality and can therefore not fully perceive it.
3. Will is a high-order causal phenomenon that affects outcome.
4. Self-actualization is alignment with one’s nature.
5. Destiny is the causal world that results from such alignment.
6. Meaning emerges from consciously participating in causality rather than denying it.

I will elaborate on these claims and explore some of their implications.

Discussion 🔗

What Destiny Is (and Is Not) 🔗

Discussions of destiny’s precise mechanisms quickly become pedantic. Not to stray from the point, I will limit myself to destiny on the individual, human level. What is important is that destiny is a matter of causality, not prophecy or prediction.

A destiny is a place in space and time that a human will find themselves in after their action or inaction. As beings embedded in time, we cannot empirically step outside of it. We cannot see the full chain of causes behind us or the exact consequences ahead. Destiny therefore does not require revelation.

I view destiny as the reality in which we live in accordance with who we truly are. Destiny is the world we inhabit by staying on the path of Self-actualization.² This is not any possible outcome, it is outcome we were meant to find. By this I will note that it doesn’t mean that everyone will achieve their potential—more on this later.

Determinism, Chaos, and the Limits of Knowledge 🔗

Chaos theory demonstrates that minor variations can expand into macroscopic effects. I have previously considered the driving principle behind it, entropy,³ and will consider in later posts how it influences a human being. This supports a causal structure to reality.

While events unfold through causal chains, I do not accept a rigid determinism that renders will meaningless and undermines agency. This is because we humans definitely don’t act deterministically, we follow our senses, emotions, instincts, not notions of fate.

We are certainly cognitively limited. When envisioning multiple outcomes to a situation, it would appear that that these multiple outcomes can exist, but this is a trick of the mind. Consider this: when you ask yourself “What do I like to eat for breakfast?” the answer simply appears. You cannot inspect the possible answers before they arise in consciousness. This has been an argument for determinism as opposed to free will, but I think conclusions from this should be modest.

Before discussing what will is and how it operates, I want to point out that tricks and illusions are part of reality. Even if they aren’t what they appear to be, they are real phenomena. They still affect behavior and therefore participate in causality.

The Role of Will 🔗

Will is the metaphysical driving force. I am not referring any particular definition as per Schopenhauer or Nietzsche, rather the perennial truth which many thinkers have sought to describe.

Factors such as birth, environment and biological structure create a field in which we act—hard limits to what can and cannot be done. But it is within this field that will operates. The bounds of will create a potential for us, within which it is capable of steering destiny, but beyond which it isn’t. This means that will does not change destiny, but it does define it by challenging the theory of determinism.

True Destiny vs. Mere Outcome 🔗

If someone wills something, perhaps they couldn’t have willed it otherwise. Fine. Let it be so. But in that case I will make a crucial distinction: any outcome may be causally determined, but True destiny is the subset of outcomes that arises when will is directed towards Self-actualization.² Only the world in which one becomes fully oneself can be called one’s True destiny.

Implications 🔗

Destiny in Myth 🔗

Destiny often carries connotations of intelligent design. I certainly don’t literally believe in intelligent design; that an all-powerful anthropomorphic being decided my every human action in accordance with its liking. For example an omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent god. I foremost view it Deistically: that whatever made reality possible caused a chain reaction³ that resulted in me existing, and will influence the circumstances of my future.

I can certainly appreciate mythological stories from different traditions, and their interpretations. And destiny is a very prevalent theme in story-telling. I’m most intimately aware of it in Indo-European folklore and mythology. Greek myth emphasizes escaping destiny as evidenced by Oedipus. Whereas the Norse myth emphasizes facing fate with bravery, whether it’s Odin preparing for Ragnarök or Sigurd claiming that he will never flee.⁴ The Hindu tradition is more explicit about adhering to divine order, dharma, as Arjuna is instructed that fighting is his duty and he has but to act.⁵

These stories shows a deep human instinct: even if we knew a specific, tragic destiny awaited us, we would still fight to change it. The noble response is always to act as if our will mattered—that is in accordance with higher order and it is meaningful.

Power, History, and the Visible Effects of Will 🔗

It should be evident that because every human is unique that no two humans can be true equals. Being “built differently” refers not only to the material aspects, every so often we encounter people who are animated by a force unlike others. You could chalk this down to genetic makeup but it does not give a satisfying explanation to the great men of history, especially not those of a regal character. Willpower can be felt as emanating the Alexanders and the Caesars. Their presence alone commands attention. Such individuals have contributed to the major flow of history, where others have left unnoticeable marks.

Of course, for every great man of history there are countless forgotten failures, and many of said men were not as remarkable as history teaches.⁶ Yet when studying the mechanisms of (political) power as per Elite theory, you find that it flows from the top down as opposed to bottom up.⁷

Self-Overcoming and the Limits of Will 🔗

A common life advice is to “do our best” given the circumstances. But how do we know if our present best reflects the true bounds of our will? Is will fixed or can it expand? This is Nietzsche’s idea of self-overcoming: that will can test its own limits, which would be a feature of what he called the Übermensch ideal.⁸ Though he wasn’t sure if it was possible for humans to live in accordance with such an ideal, though figures such as Ernst Jünger⁹ are evidence that it is within our capacity.

Responsibility vs. Victimhood 🔗

Causal influence does not eliminate agency. I reject the argument that agency dissolves because biology, emotions, or external circumstances influence behavior. Influence is not compulsion; a sentient being is the ultimate arbiter of their own fate, and causal influence does not erase this responsibility. To deny agency on those grounds is to adopt an extreme external locus of control—a victim mentality that collapses under practical judgment (e.g. court of law).

Throughout my life my stance on destiny has shifted as I lacked a coherent framework for understanding reality. I no longer see it as a divine judgment or as pure meaningless randomness. The power to define destiny is reclaimed the moment we stop denying causality and start directing our will toward who we actually are.