Dichotomy or Trichotomy of Control? The Debate Dividing Modern Stoics
Introduction
The dichotomy of control is probably the best-known Stoic idea. Epictetus states it in the opening line of the Enchiridion: some things are up to us and others are not. Up to us are our judgments, desires, and actions; not up to us are the body, possessions, reputation, and public office. This blog has dedicated an entire article to it.
Yet anyone who tries to apply it in daily life soon runs into a difficulty: many things do not seem to fit neatly into either column. Is my health up to me? Partly: I choose what I eat and how much I move, but I do not control genetics or accidents. Is winning a match up to me? Partly: I can train and play well, but the opponent is playing too.
In 2009, philosopher William Irvine proposed a solution: replacing the dichotomy with a trichotomy. The proposal became very popular—and also hotly debated.
What looks like partial control can almost always be split in two: the effort, which is yours, and the outcome, which is not.
This article presents Irvine's proposal, the objection raised by other Stoics, and why the debate—beyond academic nuances—has practical consequences.
Irvine's Proposal
In A Guide to the Good Life, Irvine argues that Epictetus's dichotomy leaves out an important category. He proposes three:
1. Things over which we have complete control: the goals we set for ourselves, our values, our judgments. 2. Things over which we have no control at all: whether the sun rises tomorrow, the past, the weather. 3. Things over which we have partial control: winning a match, getting a job, maintaining a relationship, health.
According to Irvine, most of what matters to us falls into the third category. And he proposes a strategy for dealing with it: internalizing goals. Instead of aiming to win the match, aim to play to the best of your ability. Instead of aiming to get the job, aim to prepare the best application possible.
The Objection
Several contemporary Stoics, including philosopher Massimo Pigliucci, have pointed out a flaw in this proposal: the third category is not really a new category at all. When examined carefully, everything over which we have "partial" control can be divided into two parts:
- The part that is up to us: the effort, the preparation, the way we act.
- The part that is not up to us: the final outcome, which also depends on other factors.
Winning a match, for instance, breaks down into playing well (up to me) and the opponent playing worse, the referee making fair calls, and luck being on my side (not up to me). The "partial zone" vanishes as soon as you analyze it.
From this perspective, Epictetus's dichotomy was not incomplete; it was more precise. And curiously, the very solution Irvine proposes—internalizing goals—consists in separating the part that is up to us from the rest. In other words, applying the dichotomy.
Effort and Outcome
In Invicto, Marcos Vázquez reaches the same conclusion with a simple framework: when faced with anything that matters, ask whether it is under your control. If the answer is "yes," act. If it is "no," accept. And if it is "partly," separate the effort from the outcome: the effort goes into the "yes" column and the outcome into the "no" column.
Cicero's ancient image of the archer expresses the same idea: the archer controls how much he practices, which bow he chooses, how he aims, and when he releases the arrow. He does not control the wind or the movement of the target.
Circle of Influence and Circle of Concern
Outside Stoicism, management author Stephen Covey popularized a similar idea in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. He distinguished between the circle of concern (everything we care about) and the circle of influence (what we can actually do something about), and recommended focusing our energy on the second.
Covey's "circle of influence" resembles Irvine's middle category. And the practical advice is the same: act where you can act.
Does the Difference Matter in Practice?
It might seem like a philosophers' debate with no real-world consequences. Yet there is at least one important practical difference:
- With the trichotomy, it is easy to linger in a vague sense of "partial control" over something and keep worrying about the outcome.
- With the dichotomy properly applied, you force yourself to separate precisely which part is yours and which is not—and to let go of the second completely.
For example, someone who thinks "my health is partly up to me" may remain anxious before every medical test. Someone who separates "what I eat, how much I move, and whether I go to my checkups is up to me; the test results are not" has a clear task and something concrete to let go of.
A Decision Diagram
When facing any worry:
1. Is it up to me? - Yes: What am I going to do? - No: Can I accept it? - Partly: Go to step 2. 2. Split it in two: - My effort: What concrete actions are up to me? - The outcome: What part depends on other factors? 3. Act on the effort and let go of the outcome.
Common Mistakes
- Thinking the trichotomy corrects Epictetus. In practice, it ends up applying his dichotomy.
- Staying in the "partly." That is the easiest way to keep worrying.
- Thinking that letting go of the outcome means not wanting to win. You can want the outcome and work for it without staking your peace of mind on it.
- Using the framework on others to minimize their suffering. It is a tool for yourself.
Conclusion
Dichotomy or trichotomy, the goal is the same: put your energy where it counts and let go of what you cannot change. The key is not getting stuck in the gray zone. Choose your main worry today and apply the diagram to it: if the answer is "partly," divide it in writing into effort and outcome. Commit to the actions in the first column for a week, and every time worry about the second column returns, remind yourself that the wind is not yours to command.
References
- Epictetus. Enchiridion, 1.
- Cicero. On Ends, III.22.
- Irvine, W. B. (2009). A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy. Oxford University Press.
- Pigliucci, M. (2017). How to Be a Stoic. Basic Books.
- Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Free Press.
- Vázquez, M. (2019). Invicto: Logra más. Sufre menos. Fitness Revolucionario.