Aurelius Augustinus (354-430)

For Augustinus, God is the immutable origin of the rationally hierarchical universe, in which there is a fundamental contrast between the intelligible and the sensible. The world of the sense includes only non-shareable transitory objects whereas the intelligible realm contains public, eternal realities. Man’s free will is defined as the rational choice between perishable objects and immutable ones. Augustinus shows that the compatibility of divine predestination (as well as foreknowledge) and freedom of will derives from Man’s responsibility for his choices.

Theophrastus (371 BC - 287 BC)

For Theophrastus, the necessity of universal principles derives from the corporeal and composite nature of the world. Space (defined as the arrangement and position of bodies) has no substance, and neither has time; time is an accident of motion, which in turn is the result of all activity. There is no difference between the way animals and human beings feel, sense, and reason. Man's happiness depends on not only personal effort but also external influences: "Life is ruled by fortune, not wisdom." 

Modern Reflection  

Theophrastus’s interest in character types and moral psychology makes him unexpectedly relevant to modern personality theory. His observations about how temperament shapes action anticipate contemporary research on traits, dispositions, and behavioral tendencies. While his classifications can feel impressionistic, they highlight the idea that freedom is influenced by stable patterns of response rather than isolated decisions. He offers an early attempt to understand agency through the lens of psychological diversity.

Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC)

Involving both the genus and the difference, definitions are propositions about the fundamental nature of a subject. For Aristotle, propositions are true if there is an agreement with the reality they represent. The truth can be reached by means of the logic syllogism, the laws of contradiction, and that of excluded middle. Disrespect for these laws would result in the uniformity of all assertions and in apathy concerning one’s conduct. Aristotle regards ethics as Man’s effort to identify his chief end. In fact, the world as a whole (whose ground consists of its concrete objects) is a constant transformation of matter toward an end. Man reaches his purpose or happiness by developing the learned faculty of controlling his irrational side through reason. The “autonomy of will” thus attained allows for voluntary actions, whose causes lie within Man himself.

Modern Reflection  

Aristotle’s account of voluntary action and moral responsibility anticipates modern debates about intention, character, and the conditions under which people can be held accountable. His view that freedom grows through habit and practice aligns with contemporary research on skill formation and behavioral change. While his teleological worldview differs from modern naturalism, his emphasis on practical wisdom and the cultivation of stable dispositions remains influential. He presents freedom not as a momentary choice but as a lifelong project of shaping one’s character.

Speusippus (407 BC-339 BC)

For Speusippus, the first cause of all beings cannot be a being itself (principle of alien causality). He divides philosophy into Dialectics, Ethics and Physics and insists that producing a complete definition requires identifying the differences which draw an object apart from the rest (genera and species). Speusippus regards Man as able to reach happiness (untroubledness) by means of rational control over his desires.

Modern Reflection  

Speusippus’s attempt to refine Plato’s system by separating ethics from metaphysics mirrors modern efforts to ground moral reasoning without relying on grand cosmological structures. His focus on the conditions for achieving a balanced life anticipates contemporary discussions about well‑being and psychological flourishing. Although his writings survive only in fragments, his approach suggests that freedom involves understanding the factors that contribute to a stable and harmonious character. His work points toward a more empirical, less mystical interpretation of agency.

Plato (428 BC – 348 BC)

In Plato’s ontology, the good is the ultimate principle of a reality split into two irreconcilable domains: the spiritual and its shadow, the material. The first to put forth the idea of knowledge as justified true belief, Plato states that the processual and unstable world of material phenomena merely allows for opinions, whereas the realm of non-sensible and immutable forms (intelligible ideas) can offer pure knowledge. It is only reason which can ensure a person’s inner harmony through the control it should exert over will and desires. Thus, will can only manifest freely under the influence of knowledge of the good and of the truth.

Modern Reflection  

Plato’s model of the soul as a conflict between reason, desire, and spirit parallels modern theories of the mind that emphasize competing drives and internal negotiation. His idea that freedom requires harmony among these parts resonates with contemporary discussions about self‑regulation and psychological integration. Although his metaphysical framework is distant from modern science, his insight that freedom is tied to inner order rather than external license continues to shape ethical and political thought. He offers a vision of agency grounded in self‑knowledge and disciplined aspiration.

Socrates (469 BC – 399 BC)

Father of the Socratic Method, Socrates uses a process of logical distillation which eliminates contradictory hypotheses by breaking and narrowing the problem down till the answer is found. Denying the role of a teacher, Socrates claims that he merely understands the path which a lover of wisdom must take in tracking it. He urges people to pursue knowledge since wrongdoing is a consequence of ignorance. Socrates' ideas show a conviction that Man is endowed with virtues and it is their cultivation which can allow for his best self-fulfillment because Man's will can only manifest freely under the influence of knowledge of the good and of the truth.

Modern Reflection  

Socrates’s claim that wrongdoing stems from ignorance anticipates modern views that behavior is shaped by cognitive biases, incomplete information, and distorted beliefs. His method of questioning resembles contemporary approaches to critical thinking and therapeutic dialogue, where clarity emerges through guided inquiry. While his optimism about the power of knowledge may feel too strong for modern psychology, his insistence that self‑examination is central to freedom remains deeply relevant. He reminds us that agency grows when we understand the reasons behind our actions.

Protagoras (490 BC – 420 BC)

Protagoras is an agnostic: “Many things prevent knowledge including the obscurity of the subject and the brevity of human life.” Protagoras’ epistemology reminds of a type of phenomenalism according to which reality as people understand it is determined by their subjectivity. Able to make the worse line of reasoning appear superior, the sophist insists that one has to always strengthen the weakest argument because the less appealing argument can hide the best answer. Interpreted as a form of radical relativism, Protagoras’ idea that “man is the measure of all things” shows that his philosophical preoccupations are part of a shift in the ancient Greek philosophical focus from natural philosophy to human philosophy.

Modern Reflection  

Protagoras’s claim that “man is the measure of all things” resonates with modern perspectives that emphasize cultural frameworks, subjective experience, and the constructed nature of values. His relativism challenges contemporary readers to consider how social norms shape what we perceive as freedom or constraint. Although his position raises difficult questions about truth and responsibility, it anticipates ongoing debates about pluralism and the limits of objectivity. He invites reflection on how human agency is embedded within shifting contexts rather than fixed absolutes.