Many thinkers, like René Descartes, argue that free will is self-evident—if one feels free, one must be free.

Daniel Dennett claims that as long as we act without external compulsion, we have meaningful autonomy. But Kenism challenges this assumption: feeling free is not proof of freedom.

A choice may feel independent, yet it carries the weight of past experiences, unconscious influences, and unseen forces. What if the will is only free within the constraints it does not recognize?

Robert Kane’s libertarian view holds that real free will exists when we can make “self-forming actions”—moments where we consciously shape our character.

But Kenism questions whether these moments are truly free or merely the result of prior influences converging in a new way. If you abandon a belief, was that shift purely yours, or was it dictated by past experiences, external pressures, and unseen conditioning?

If free will is real, why does it always move within patterns shaped by history?

Hard determinists, like Derk Pereboom, claim that all choices are dictated by prior causes—there is no free will, only causality.

Kenism rejects this extreme, but also does not fall into Dennett’s compatibilism, which argues that free will and determinism can coexist. Instead, Kenism presents free will as a spectrum—control is never absent, but it is never absolute.

The real question is not whether we have free will, but how much of it belongs to us—and how much is borrowed from what has already shaped us.

Jean-Paul Sartre believed that radical freedom exists—one can always reinvent oneself, escaping the past entirely. Kenism challenges this notion: breaking is not escaping.

Even rebellion is dictated by what it opposes. To reject something, one must first be shaped by it. If one revolts against tradition, is that not still a reaction to tradition? Can one ever truly act without reference to the past, or is every defiance still tethered to what it resists?

Compatibilists, like David Hume, argue that even if determinism is true, responsibility still exists as long as individuals act according to their own motivations.

Kenism, however, asks a deeper question: if choices are shaped by the past, then what does responsibility truly mean? Responsibility does not vanish, but its nature changes. True mastery lies not in denying past influences, but in recognizing them and navigating them with awareness. If one cannot escape the chain, the only path to freedom is in learning how to move within it.

Most philosophies either defend free will or reject it entirely. Kenism does neither. It does not claim the will is fully free, nor that it is fully bound—it reveals the layers in between, exposing the unseen forces that shape decisions while still leaving space for awareness and refinement.

If you seek truth beyond illusion, beyond extremes, Kenism offers the path of understanding.

You will receive your eBooks in the following formats:

• PDF
• EPUB
• Kindle

If you encounter any issues or need assistance with your downloads, our support team is always here to help.