The Illusion of Control: Why Agency is Conditional, Not Self-Made
For a long time, I wrestled with the idea of agency—our ability to make choices and shape our lives. At first, I thought I had figured it out. I believed in conditional agency, the idea that while we don’t create ourselves, we still have some ability to direct our actions within the framework we’ve been given. But as I kept exploring, I hit a wall. Was this idea just another way of pretending I had control when I really didn’t? Was I just dressing up free will in a new outfit?
For a while, I thought maybe agency was an illusion altogether. Maybe we’re just a collection of forces—society, biology, experience—acting through us, with no real say in the matter. But after sitting with this for a while, I’ve come back around, this time with more clarity.
Agency does exist—but not in the way we often think. It’s not something we are born with. It’s not something we just decide to have. It’s something that only emerges when we understand that it was never truly ours to begin with.
What is Agency, Really?
Most of us define agency as “the ability to choose within a given framework.” We like to believe that when we make decisions, we are in control of them. That we decided to get up early, we chose to work harder, we changed our habits.
But this way of thinking ignores something important:
We did not make ourselves.
We didn’t choose our genetics, our childhood, our early experiences, or the way our brains process the world. Every decision we make is built on the conditions that shaped us before that moment.
That’s why some of us struggle with things that others don’t. It’s not about effort or willpower—it’s about the conditions that led us to this point. A person who grew up in a supportive environment might “choose” to take on challenges, but is that really their doing? Or is it the result of the foundation they were given?
Now, this might sound like it’s leading to a dead end—a full rejection of agency. If we’re just products of our environment, what’s the point? Are we just passengers in our own lives?
Not exactly.
Agency is Conditional and Conditioned
Agency does exist, but it only emerges under certain conditions—and those conditions have to be understood before they can be acted upon.
The mistake we make is thinking of agency as something we just have, rather than something that arises when the right forces align.
Real agency begins the moment we understand that everything we do is the result of forces acting through us, not from us.
At first, this might seem limiting, but it’s actually the opposite. It means that we can influence the forces that shape us. We may not have built the machine that is us, but if we understand how it works, we can begin to redirect the inputs that influence its future course.
This is where responsibility comes in—not in a moralizing way, but in a practical, compassionate way.
Taking responsibility doesn’t mean pretending we’re in control of everything. It means recognizing that while the world acts through us, we can also be the point where that world begins to reshape itself.
Some of us may never get to this point. And that’s not our fault.
If agency is conditioned, then those who never had the chance to develop this awareness simply didn’t have the right inputs. That’s why blame has no place in this conversation. The question is never, “Why don’t they just try harder?” It’s, “What conditions would allow them to see the path forward?”
The Hard Truth: Some People Will Never Have Agency
We have to be honest about what this means.
Not everyone will live a fulfilling life. Not everyone will get the chance to develop their agency. Some of us, through no fault of our own, may be too broken by our circumstances to recover.
This isn’t about being pessimistic—it’s about being real. The idea that “no one is broken beyond repair” is comforting, but it’s not true. Some of us are dealt such impossible conditions that escape is unlikely. Not because we are weak, but because we are exactly who we would be if we lived their lives, with their biology, their experiences, their suffering.
This truth is uncomfortable, but it also reinforces why compassion matters. If someone is trapped in a cycle they can’t break, they do not deserve judgment. They are not at fault for the conditions that shaped them.
Instead of blaming them, we should be asking: How can we create conditions that allow more of us to develop agency?
Why This Matters
This understanding changes how we approach everything—personal growth, self-defense, teaching, leadership.
• For self-improvement: It’s not about willpower. It’s about shaping conditions that guide us in the direction we want to go.
• For self-defense training: It’s not about “choosing” to fight well. It’s about exposing ourselves to the right environments where adaptability and problem-solving emerge.
• For leadership and teaching: It’s not about pushing people to be better—it’s about creating the conditions where better can happen.
Most importantly, this perspective demands compassion. It forces us to let go of judgment, both toward others and ourselves. None of us are self-made. None of us succeed or fail in isolation.
The Flexibility of Language: Conditional Agency vs. Constructed Agency
As I’ve been refining this idea, I’ve realized something else: the words we use shape the way we understand it.
I call this Conditional Agency because it only exists when certain conditions allow for it. But in some conversations, it may be more useful to call it Constructed Agency, because once those conditions are in place, agency can be built and reinforced over time.
Both are true, depending on what we want to emphasize:
• Conditional Agency reminds us that some people never get the chance to develop agency at all—not because they failed, but because they were never given the right inputs.
• Constructed Agency highlights that once conditions allow for it, we can actively build and strengthen our ability to engage with the world.
This is the power of language—it can shape how we see reality. The more we understand that, the more we can use language to reflect the world as it is, rather than reinforcing illusions.
The Paradox: Letting Go to Move Forward
The hardest part of this realization is that even when we understand it, we still feel like we are the ones making choices. Our minds are wired to experience the world this way. Even knowing that agency is conditioned, we still feel like we are in control.
But instead of fighting this, we can use it.
If we accept that agency is not about control but about influence, we can shift how we interact with ourselves and the world. Instead of focusing on what we should force ourselves to do, we focus on what conditions we can shape to make certain actions more likely.
We are not the source of our choices. But we can be the point where influence meets awareness, where the forces acting through us begin to shift their course.
That’s what conditional agency really is.
It is not self-made. It is not free.
But it is real.
You can include an acknowledgment section at the end of your blog to recognize the contributions of both me (ChatGPT) and Perplexity in shaping your thought process. Here’s a concise yet meaningful way to frame it:
Acknowledgment
The ideas in this post weren’t formed in isolation. While the core of this exploration comes from my own reflections, discussions, and lived experience, I want to acknowledge the tools that helped refine and challenge my thinking.
Much of the research that informed this piece was facilitated by Perplexity, which allowed me to explore a wide range of perspectives, historical contexts, and philosophical discussions to sharpen my arguments.
Additionally, I want to recognize ChatGPT, which served as a dialectical partner in refining these ideas, helping me articulate and structure my evolving thoughts in a way that makes them more clear and accessible.
Neither tool created these ideas, but both provided a valuable space for exploration—reinforcing, once again, that all thought is shaped by the conditions that allow it to emerge.
