Finally, Allport states that “psychology knows that there is relatively greater freedom in certain modes of choosing than in others.” (Allport, 1954, p. 65) The individual who directly combats an impulse will often be unsuccessful in his venture, for the denial of fulfillment of this impulse will itself act as an impetus to further strengthen the impulse, if the individual instead considers the impulse regarding ultimate goals or desires, i.e. if one asks himself whet “on the whole” this is the course of action he wants to take, than he will be more successful, with less strain.

All of these psychologists within this third category tend to agree on several points. They all conclude that determinism and free will are actually two sides of the same principle. Determinism necessarily implies the possible presence of freedom and vice versa, They would also tend to agree that we are free to the extent that we make use of our unique ability to understand, transcend and reflect upon ourself and our environment — and we would of course be joined at this point by a chorus of determinists and free-willists from classical and modern ages.

These psychologists within the third category recognize that the position which one takes concerning freedom and determinism depends upon the way one looks at the problem; however, they do not feel that the discussion of these concerns is meaningless. The logical empiricist in the fourth category, however, do not believe that the terms “determinism” and “free-will”, nor a discussion of the conceptions lying behind these terms, are meaningful, nor are these terms useful or necessary in the scientific and therapeutic enterprises.

Implications for Professional Coaching

When applied to the compatibilist perspectives, the coaching template yields an emphasis on the domain of ideas. It is all about moving beyond deliberation to action. It is fine to be clear about the current environment and about one’s aspirations—but it is time to build the bridge between the world that now exists and the world that is waiting to unfold. Our decisions and actions are determined by a interplay between internal and external forces. Reality is created by us through our actions. This means a coaching focus on the client’ creative processes.

The coaching enterprise, in other words, places emphasis on and leans towards the client’s capacity and willingness to be divergent in their generativity—expanding the options they are considering and operating outside a specific conceptual box. The coach then places emphasis on and leans toward the client’s capacity and willingness to be convergent in this generativity—honing in on the option that is best aligned with what they know about the world (information) and what they would like the world to be (intentions).

A free-will perspective requires a search for purpose, while a determinist perspective requires a search for cause. An appreciative perspective can effectively bring together purpose and cause, when it accompanies an exploration of alternative options. (Bergquist, and Mura, 2011). The coach guides their client toward recognition of times in the past when they have been successful in engaging specific options. What “caused” their success and how did this success relate to the purposes for which the client originally engaged in action? How is the environment in which our client is now operating similar to and different from that operating when they have been successful in the past. What would a narrative of successful action look like today and how would it differ from that which existed before?