Estimated reading time: 11 minutes
The hardest decisions usually come when we do not have all the facts.
We cannot know if or when we will get a second chance at an opportunity. We do not know if having a difficult conversation with someone will lead to reconciliation or complete estrangement. We do not know if taking a new path will be successful or not, if taking a risk will result in a reward or loss, if we will improve our ability to diagnose, if the person we trust will continue to be trustworthy, or if our plan will survive the next shift in circumstances.
We often respond to this uncertainty by seeking more certainty. Sometimes, additional information provides greater clarity, increases awareness of risk, and provides a safeguard against carelessness. However, the Stoics recognized that circumstances can only be predicted to a certain extent and that at the point where you can no longer improve based on your predictions through continued contemplation; procrastination may transition from exercising caution to avoiding responsibility for making a choice.
The Stoics did not claim to have developed methods for predicting the future. They did not guarantee that having a calm and clear mind would allow us to know what happens in the future. Rather, they provided a way of acting when prediction fails: having specific, positive evidence of our choices, being deliberate about selecting what is a worthy option for us, being mindful of our duties, and committing ourselves fully to our choices; we must also be resolute in refusing to judge our choices as worthy based only upon their outcomes.
The position of the Stoics is not a position of pessimistic expectations; it is a position of steady agency.
The mistake of demanding a guarantee
We tend to judge a decision’s good qualities based on the outcome. If we find success in our job, we made a good decision. If our investment fails, we have made an unwise choice. If our conversation produces good results, we spoke wisely. If it did not go over well, we should have stayed silent. Therefore, we agree that the outcome is very important. While Stoics don’t argue that we should be indifferent to all causes of health and illnesses, we know health is better than an illness, security is better than danger, a repaired relationship is better than an injured relationship, and a just outcome is better than an unjust outcome. To suggest otherwise is not only unwise but also negligent.
However, while there is a preferred outcome, we cannot conclude from a disappointing result that our decision was a poor one. A person can make a wise decision, prepared with great care and ethics, but still face circumstances beyond his/her control, while another person can make a rash decision and get lucky. If we only judge our decisions on their outcome, we condition ourselves to admire luck and mistrust integrity. Keep in mind that every decision depends on the information we have available.
Stoics require much more than a hope of success. We should also ask ourselves, regardless of the success or failure of the decision, what will be the measure of our responsibility for it?
In most cases, we indicate factors such as the quality of our attention, the honesty of our evaluation and analysis of the situation, the fairness of our treatment of others, our level of care in preparing for action, and the action we ultimately choose to take. We do not include our environmental circumstances (e.g. weather), the character of the people that we are responsible for interacting with, the future behaviour of a market, or every potential consequence that may result from our actions.
This does not negate the fact that uncertainty is a very negative experience for most of us; but it does allow for us to be better able to understand uncertainty as it pertains to our thoughts and actions.
Caution in one place, confidence in another
One of the most advantageous pieces of advice offered by Epictetus, as a representative of the school of Stoicism, regarding difficult decisions, is to separate caution and confidence entirely.
Caution should guide us when we apply our own judgment. Care must be taken to not deceive ourselves, to not confuse fear with wisdom, to not choose malice over fairness, or to let the desire for an outcome outweigh the ethical implications of the means used to achieve that outcome. This area of judgment as to our own conduct is our responsibility, and it is here that we must exercise the most care.
Confidence, on the other hand, should be our response to the unpredictable. Confidence does not mean that we believe that our plans will succeed; rather, it means that we believe that the outcome we expect will not prevent us from fulfilling our duty, nor negate the validity of our good faith efforts to achieve it.
“In that which is not of the will have courage; in that which is of the will have caution.” — Epictetus, Discourses, Book II
In practice, many of us invert this process. Rather than expect what will occur based on our actions or decisions, we assume that we can firmly control what happens. Thus, as we worry ourselves into a state of hysteria over what may happen, we also tend to disregard a sense of responsibility regarding how we conduct ourselves. We often believe that it is acceptable to act in an unprincipled way or violate the principles we espouse simply because the unknown is creating stress or anxiety about the situation.
The Stoic’s reversal is easy to express but quite difficult to follow: place your concern where you have control, and your confidence where you do not.
A decision is more than a forecast
A major aspect of modern decision making is prediction:
What are the odds?
What is the upside?
What can go wrong?
All of these questions require some thought. The Stoics do not ignore evidence, probability, or practical foresight; however, they would say that a decision cannot be simply a prediction. A prediction informs us of probabilities for events, while a decision indicates the level of responsibility we are ready to accept.
Let’s explore the situation of confronting a co-worker who has a pattern of unfairness. In terms of prediction, there are many variables in play; the person confronting the co-worker could receive an apology, denial, retaliation, or no resolution at all. Stoicism does not eliminate the potential outcomes; however, Stoicism does provide an alternative set of questions to consider:
What do you know for certain?
What is the ethical response?
Where do I fit in?
What can I support, regardless of the outcome?
The Stoic concept of appropriate action is what makes Stoicism relevant. The right thing to do does not necessarily mean the outcome is what I want; however, the right thing to do has reasoned justification in the given circumstances, accounts for the relationships present, and does not allow fear or desire to dictate the response.
When considering an issue from the Stoic perspective, it will require more thought and reflection. The Stoic approach to decision making avoids two extremes: viewing all uncertainties as evidence that you cannot act and acting impulsively based on a strong desire.
Preferred, not possessed
The Stoics often refer to desired outcomes as “preferred.” Many people misunderstanding what the phrase means. “Preferred” does not refer to a person’s Health and Safety, A good name, Wealth or a Desired End Result. Instead, it says:
“When you seek after these, do so in an intelligent manner, and do so without the illusion you Own them.”
You may prefer winning a contract, regaining health, maintaining a relationship, or receiving the recognition you have earned. Such preferences must be justly preferred, reasonable, and accepted as having real importance. But your entire value for any action should not hinge on possessing the preferred outcome, reward/triumph.
The Stoic’s view of objectives is based on the path (the discipline) taken to achieve those objectives instead of solely focusing on the objective itself.
When you pursue any objective, you pursue a target.
You do not allow your soul to be enslaved to the necessity of reaching that target.
When the targeted objective is altered in a way contrary to yours, the distinction between these two philosophies becomes very clear. A decision to pursue a targeted outcome based solely on possession will conclude that the efforts were worthless because you did not achieve the desired outcome; Conversely, a Stoic who made a decision based on a Stoics understanding of virtue will be able to ask, “What continued to be worthy in the manner I pursued it, and what should I have learned to do differently?”
A response to an outcome based on possession is rigid, and a response based on virtue will continue to be open to a correction.
The quiet reserve in every plan
Stoics view their plans with an implicit reservation. Stoics’ plans usually include an unstated backup plan, “I will do this, if the conditions allow”. This is not a magical expression, nor an excuse for weak commitments: it is a statement of reality as it stands today.
A plan that includes uncertainty is not of lesser weight; rather, it is a more serious plan; it clearly shows a separation between commitment and fantasy. You may choose to apply, start the project, talk, take the trip or assist. You will devote yourself to the task with maximum discipline, but you cannot responsibly promise that the necessary conditions will remain constant for you to succeed.
An individual using a backup plan can communicate two things at once. One: “I will act vigorously”; two: “I will not assume that a vigorous action means that the world is under my control”.
This is especially helpful in situations where procrastination is portrayed as careful analysis; where an individual spends an excessive amount of time in research to support or substantiate a decision that could not be made due to fear of judgement, disappointment, or being wrong.
The backup plan does not clarify when sufficient evidence is enough to warrant a decision. However, the backup plan does remind a person that no amount of evidence can eliminate all the risk from living a meaningful life.
At some point, the role of further research is not to gather additional information, but rather to choose wisely based on what you already have.
The people inside the decision
Stoicism implies that an act is never simply an individual choice, but rather represents an ethical aspect of one’s involvement in the relationships and communities we inhabit as human beings. Thus, we as human beings form part of a variety of relationships, e.g. family, neighbours, friends, colleagues, citizens, and the greater community at large.
Stoicism does not advocate for every individual to sacrifice themselves for the sake of approval from others but rather demonstrates that to make a complete decision one cannot simply take into account what will benefit them alone; therefore, the answer to the question “What do I want” requires an additional dimension: “What do I owe?”, “Who will pay?” and “What would Fairness require if I were not to benefit?”
In an uncertain environment, asking these questions can help you avoid becoming anxious over every decision you make and will stop you from treating every decision you make as a means of protecting your status, comfort, or your private interests. Without acknowledging the role of your various communities, your use of Stoicism could become little more than a fancy way to justify your own self-centred actions.
In some instances, the obligations associated with a decision may not be fully understood, and the individual may not know for certain if their truth will be accepted by others, but they do know that lying is not an ethical choice. They may also not know if their expression of compassion will be reciprocated, but they do know that the vulnerable person needs this support. Similarly, they may not know if holding individuals accountable will be a popular choice, but they do know that no action taken will continue to allow the potential for harm to exist.
Ultimately, there are infinite possibilities available in the future, yet our obligation to one another is still consistently present.
A Stoic decision practice for uncertain moments
To start the process of making an impossible decision due to the uncertainty of the future, frame the decision as a clear, one-sentence statement defining the action you believe is best. Do not say you need certainty about the future in order to make the decision, that’s unrealistic. Instead, articulate the action you will take based on your current understanding of the situation, including what you feel is the most responsible next step.
Next, it is important to look at the facts versus forecasts. The facts you should consider include all that has happened, all that has been spoken, all that you have at your disposal (resources, obligations, etc.), and any constraints you are confronted with. The forecasts are the possibilities of what you think might, could, or should occur (the negative or positive aspect of what might be possible).
To help define the preferred outcome of any decision you are trying to make, state the preferred outcome and why it is so important to you. You may wish for the relationship to continue, the project to be successful, or for the risk to be decreased to a minimum or for the opportunity to remain open. By naming your preferred outcome, you will not fall into the trap of thinking that detaching from preferences is an appropriate way to handle difficult situations. As an example of Stoic thinking, the preferred outcome serves as direction for your efforts and is not the outcome itself.
Your next step is to determine your personal sphere of responsibility. What can you prepare for, ask for, verify, say, refuse, offer, document or even do something about? What is the sphere of responsibility for others and for circumstances or time? This practice allows you to cease putting an effort on things you do not control.
The next step is to analyse the decision you have made on the basis of duties and reversibility. For example, who will be affected? What is the fairest approach to additional resources, time, and responses? When you consider reversibility, does what you will undertake represent the best possible chance to review what the outcome will be if you take a minimal version of the action rather than a guaranteed larger version?
In this way, it is appropriate to accept responsibility for the results of your decisions and never to pretend to be all-knowing. All Stoics demonstrate great courage by acting on their reflections and releasing themselves from the safety of their reflections.
After the decision
Uncertainty continues after action. The Stoic response to a disappointing result is neither denial nor contempt for oneself. It is something better, review, reflection.
Ask what information was missing, what judgment was sound, what assumption proved weak, what duty was met, and what needs to change next time. Try not to use hindsight to punish the person who had less knowledge than you have now. That person was you, working inside the limits of the moment!
This is one of Stoicism’s quiet strengths, the fact that it does not require a person to be invulnerable to disappointment. It asks them to convert disappointment into clearer perception rather than into a permanent accusation against themselves or the world.
The Stoics made decisions under uncertainty by refusing to treat uncertainty as a reason to abandon judgement. They prepared carefully, selected what was preferable, considered their roles and responsibilities and then they acted. And when fate supplied an outcome they did not choose, they returned to the one task that remained theirs:
To meet the next moment with honesty, courage, and proportion.
Certainty is not the condition for a good decision. Character is the condition for making one.
By Dr Ioannis Syrigos
References
Epictetus. Discourses, Book II, Chapter 1, “That Confidence Is Not Inconsistent with Caution.” Translated by George Long. Internet Classics Archive. https://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/discourses.2.two.html
Kamtekar, Rachana. “Marcus Aurelius.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, substantive revision 2025. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marcus-aurelius/
Durand, Martin. “Stoicism.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, published 2023. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/