I was watching a movie last night about the exiled Kaiser Wilhelm during World War II. It was called The Exception and it starred Christopher Plummer as the Kaiser. At the time, he was in exile in Holland while Adolph Hitler was ravaging Europe. He had just invaded Holland in 1940 and the story tells the tale of the military and service people surrounding the Kaiser as Hitler tried to manipulate him to root out the remaining monarchists who he thought were fundamentally disloyal to him. It is clear that the Kaiser did not much agree with the ways of Nazi Germany and Hitler, but at the same time, he and his wife wanted very much to be reestablished onto the throne of Prussia and the Second Reich or Deutsches Kaiserreich as he had been when he was dethroned in 1918 (technically, he abdicated). He gets a visit from Heinrich Himmler, the Reichsführer of the SS and Gestapo and we see the interplay between those who supported the extreme ways of Hitler and Himmler and those who were more moderate in the face of the building authoritarianism of the day.
Along the way, both the Kaiser and his military bodyguard befriend a young girl who is a servant in the Kaiser’s household. She is secretly Jewish and both men are aware of it and not inclined to hold that against her. But it is also clear that they are both powerless to counteract the momentum of the powers that be and they have to directly witness the evil represented by Himmler’s views. Over dinner, with all in attendance, Himmler describes how they have tested killing disabled children and how they must find more efficient ways to dispose of these drags on the advancement of the German state. This monologue on ethnic cleansing is a showstopper that horrifies some and is ignored or accepted by others. The Kaiser is clearly put off by this while his wife, who wants back into Berlin society, is prepared to ignore it all. When the Kaiser speaks afterwards to the young Jewish girl, he tries to explain the situation. He knows that even he, despite all his prior power, is unable to stop this evil from advancing, so in search of an explanation he simply says that it must all be God’s Will. That phrase stuck with me and got me thinking.
What exactly is God’s Will? That’s one of the deepest questions people grapple with across different faith traditions and philosophical frameworks. The concept varies significantly depending on religious perspective. In Christianity, God’s Will is often understood on multiple levels – a sovereign Will (God’s ultimate plan for all creation), a moral Will (the ethical standards revealed in scripture), and an individual Will (guidance for personal decisions). Many Christians believe God’s Will involves loving God and neighbor, pursuing justice and mercy, and seeking relationship with the divine. In Islam, God’s Will (mashī’ah) is central – everything occurs by Allah’s permission, and submission to God’s Will is literally what “Islam” means. This involves following the guidance in the Quran and the example of Muhammad. In Judaism, God’s Will is often understood through Torah and the ongoing interpretation of how to live righteously, pursue justice (tikkun olam – repairing the world), and maintain the covenant relationship. Eastern religious perspectives vary considerably – Hinduism sees the ultimate purpose as moksha (liberation from the cycle of rebirth), while Buddhism focuses on ending suffering through enlightenment, though the concept of “God’s purpose” doesn’t map directly onto these frameworks.
So that bring us back to a fundamental question for the ages…does free will exist or not? Hard determinism says that free will is an illusion. Every decision is the inevitable result of prior causes – brain chemistry, genetics, environment, physics. You couldn’t have chosen differently given the exact state of the universe at that moment. Libertarian thinking says that genuine free will does exist. Humans have the capacity to make choices that aren’t fully determined by prior causes. There’s something about consciousness or agency that transcends pure causation. Free will and determinism can coexist. Even if our choices are causally determined, we can still be “free” in a meaningful sense – acting according to our own desires and reasoning without external coercion. This is the most popular view among philosophers. But still, plenty of people think that free will doesn’t exist, but neither does pure determinism due to quantum randomness. We’re subject to forces beyond our control whether deterministic or random. That sounds a lot like fatalism to me. What science suggests is that neuroscience shows decisions beginning in the brain before conscious awareness, suggesting our sense of choosing may be retrospective rationalization. But this doesn’t definitively settle the question – it depends on what we mean by “free will.” Regardless of the metaphysical truth, we’re built to experience choice and to hold ourselves and others accountable. Society functions on the assumption of agency and responsibility.
My take is that we clearly don’t have absolute free will (you can’t choose your genes or initial environment), but we also aren’t purely passive. The more interesting question might be: how much agency do we have, and how can we expand it? My own weight loss journey is actually relevant here – I’m experiencing the tension between deterministic factors (genetics, metabolism, circumstances) and agency (daily choices, discipline, planning). Whatever the metaphysical reality, acting as if I have meaningful choice seems to produce better outcomes than fatalism.
On the broader geopolitical stage, I feel the same way. There are forces which are out of my/our control. There is a “nature of man” issue at play that suggests that survivalism and competitive aggression are natural instincts that are brain stem issues and not cerebral issues. There are also historical cycles that impact on us all and bring external pressures to bear that drive social behavior. But we are not simple animals that are unable to get past our brain stems. We have a very developed cerebral capability that has evolved for a reason. Several key differences set human brains apart from other animals. Humans have exceptionally large brains relative to body size. Our brain-to-body ratio is remarkably high. More importantly, we have disproportionately large cerebral cortex compared to other structures. Our prefrontal cortex is responsible for executive functions like planning, impulse control, abstract thinking, and complex decision-making. It is dramatically enlarged in humans compared to other primates and allows for sophisticated forward-thinking and delayed gratification. We also have cerebral language centers that support complex language. While other animals communicate, human language is qualitatively different in its complexity and abstraction. The human neocortex has exceptional neuronal density and synaptic connections, particularly in association areas that integrate information across different brain regions.
Human brains continue developing into the mid-20s, particularly the prefrontal cortex. This extended plasticity allows for massive learning and cultural transmission. We have enhanced ability to model others’ mental states – understanding that others have distinct beliefs, desires, and perspectives different from our own. We have the ability for abstract and symbolic thinking. This gives us capacity for mathematics, metaphor, art, religion, hypothetical reasoning, and thinking about things that don’t exist or haven’t happened. We also have cultural accumulation, the ability to build on previous generations’ knowledge, creating cumulative culture that ratchets forward rather than having each generation start from scratch. This is a key differentiator in our evolutionary development as humans.
So, when the Kaiser says that it is all God’s Will, I reject that notion as Medieval. That’s what kept serfs and nobles apart. The divine right simply does not exist other than the right of all people to self-actualize regardless of what was “written in their stars”. Evildoers want us to believe that we cannot fight God’s Will, but I prefer the notion made famous by Edmund Burke that “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” These days, too many of us are choosing passivity, indifference, or fear from those who might oppose it. Silence and inaction from otherwise decent people create the permissive environment where cruelty, injustice, and tyranny can flourish. The Kaiser and his reaction is a perfect example as the exception of evil becoming the rule and the good people refusing to remain silent become the exception. God’s Will can only be for good to prevail over evil.