The Unseen Tug-of-War: Desire, Will, and the Architecture of Choice

In the grand tapestry of human experience, few dynamics are as central and as perennially debated as the intricate interplay between desire and will. Every choice we make, from the mundane to the monumental, is a subtle (or not-so-subtle) negotiation between what we want and what we decide to do. This article delves into the philosophical bedrock of this relationship, exploring how classical and modern thinkers from the Great Books of the Western World have grappled with the question of who truly holds the reins in the human Mind when a Man stands at the crossroads of decision.

At its core, this exploration reveals that choice is rarely a simple act but rather a complex synthesis where our innate inclinations meet our rational capacity for self-determination. Understanding this dynamic is not merely an academic exercise; it is fundamental to grasping human agency, ethical responsibility, and the very essence of what it means to be a conscious being navigating the world.

Defining the Players: Desire and Will

Before we explore their interplay, it’s crucial to establish what we mean by these two powerful forces.

Desire: Often understood as an inclination, an appetite, a passion, or a longing. It is the pull towards something perceived as good or pleasurable, or away from something perceived as bad or painful. Desires can be biological (hunger, thirst), emotional (love, anger), or intellectual (a thirst for knowledge). They often feel involuntary, a given part of our psychological landscape.
Will: This refers to the faculty of the Mind that enables us to make conscious choices, to act deliberately, and to exert self-control. It is our capacity for rational decision-making, for initiating action, and for pursuing a chosen course even in the face of conflicting desires. The will is often associated with freedom, autonomy, and moral responsibility.

The tension between these two is a defining feature of the human condition. Do we act purely on impulse, driven by our desires, or do we exert our will, guided by reason and principle?

The Classical Perspective: Reason's Dominion

Ancient Greek philosophy, particularly as articulated by Plato and Aristotle, laid foundational concepts for understanding the relationship between desire and will, often placing reason as the ultimate guide.

Plato's Tripartite Soul: The Charioteer's Dilemma

In his seminal work, The Republic, Plato famously describes the soul (or Mind) as having three parts:

Appetitive (Epithymia): The seat of our basic desires and bodily urges (hunger, thirst, sexual urges).
Spirited (Thymos): The part that seeks honor, recognition, and can be an ally to reason or appetite.
Rational (Logistikon): The part that seeks truth, wisdom, and is capable of logical thought and moral judgment.

Plato uses the analogy of a charioteer (reason/will) guiding two horses: one noble (spirited) and one unruly (appetitive desire). For a Man to live a virtuous and harmonious life, the rational part, through its will, must be in control, directing the spirited and appetitive parts. When desire overwhelms reason, the Mind is in disarray, leading to poor choices and inner conflict.

Aristotle on Voluntary Action and Practical Wisdom

Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics, provides a more nuanced view, emphasizing the role of practical wisdom (phronesis) in guiding choices. For Aristotle, a truly voluntary action involves both knowledge of the particular circumstances and a deliberate choice based on a rational deliberation about the means to an end.

Desire (Orexis): Aristotle acknowledges that our desires and appetites are natural and can even be good when properly directed.
Will (Prohairesis): He defines choice (prohairesis) as "deliberate desire." It's not just any desire, but one that has been shaped and endorsed by reason. The will, informed by practical wisdom, aims to align our desires with virtuous action. A virtuous Man is one whose desires are harmonized with reason, making virtuous choices feel natural and pleasant.

The Medieval Turn: The Will's Ascendancy and Inner Conflict

The medieval period, heavily influenced by Christian theology, brought a heightened focus on the will as a distinct faculty, often grappling with the concept of sin and the struggle against inherent desires.

Augustine: The Battle of Two Wills

Saint Augustine, in his Confessions, vividly portrays the agonizing struggle between opposing desires within the same Mind. He speaks of "two wills," one spiritual and one carnal, pulling him in different directions. This internal conflict highlights the will's capacity for self-division and the profound difficulty in choosing the good when powerfully tempted by desire. For Augustine, the will is not merely reason's servant but a powerful, often fractured, faculty that requires divine grace to choose truly good ends. The Man is seen as fundamentally free, yet often enslaved by his own desires.

Aquinas: Intellect and Will in Harmony

Thomas Aquinas, synthesizing Aristotelian philosophy with Christian theology in his Summa Theologica, posits a more integrated view. For Aquinas:

Intellect: The intellect apprehends the good and presents it to the will.
Will: The will is the rational appetite, moving towards the good as understood by the intellect. It is naturally drawn to the universal good.

While desires (passions) can influence the will, the rational will retains its freedom to choose. A Man makes good choices when his intellect correctly identifies the good, and his will then freely moves towards it, integrating rather than suppressing his natural desires.

Modern Dilemmas: Autonomy and the Self

The Enlightenment and subsequent philosophical movements further refined the understanding of will and desire, emphasizing individual autonomy and the moral imperative.

Kant: The Good Will and Duty

Immanuel Kant, in his Critique of Practical Reason and Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, elevates the will to a position of supreme importance. For Kant, a morally good action is one performed from a "good will," meaning it is done out of duty, not out of inclination or desire.

Desire (Inclination): Kant views desires as empirical and contingent, often leading to heteronomous (externally determined) actions.
Will (Practical Reason): The good will acts according to universal moral laws, which reason dictates. It is autonomous, self-legislating, and represents the Man's capacity to transcend his natural inclinations and act purely out of respect for the moral law.

For Kant, the interplay is a tension: true moral choice occurs when the will asserts its rational autonomy over the pulls of desire.

The Interplay in Action: Choice as a Synthesis

The journey through these philosophical landscapes reveals that the interplay between desire and will is far from simple. It is a dynamic, complex negotiation that shapes every choice a Man makes.

Feature	Desire	Will
Nature	Inclination, appetite, passion, longing	Faculty of conscious choice, self-control
Origin	Often involuntary, biological, emotional	Rational, deliberate, autonomous
Goal	Pleasure, satisfaction, avoidance of pain	Good, duty, self-determination
Role in Choice	Provides the "what I want"	Provides the "what I decide"
Philosophical View	Often seen as needing guidance/control	Often seen as the guide/controller

Our choices are rarely purely rational or purely driven by desire. Instead, they emerge from a constant dialogue within the Mind:

Sometimes, desire and will align perfectly – we want to do what we know is right, and we choose to do it.
Other times, desire presents a powerful temptation, and the will must exert its strength to choose a different, often more difficult, path.
In some cases, the will can even cultivate and reshape desires, training the Mind to find pleasure in virtuous actions, as Aristotle suggested.

The constant negotiation between what we are drawn to and what we commit to is the very architecture of human choice. It speaks to our freedom, our capacity for self-mastery, and our ongoing struggle to integrate the diverse aspects of our being into a coherent and purposeful life.

(Image: A classical painting depicting a person, perhaps Hercules at the crossroads, torn between two allegorical figures: one representing virtue or duty (stoic, robed, pointing upwards), and the other representing pleasure or vice (alluring, draped, gesturing towards earthly delights). The central figure's face shows deep contemplation and inner conflict, symbolizing the Mind's struggle between desire and will in making a choice.)

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Plato's Chariot Allegory Explained""