The will is either free or it is not free. One of these answers is objectively true. But which one? What resources and reasons do we need to employ in deciding this question and other philosophical issues? In my view, one of James' most important contributions to philosophy lies in showing that our active and emotional natures provide a part of these resources and reasons. In this paper, I shall elaborate and defend James' position on this point by focusing on the topic of free will. In doing so, I draw on his early writings (until and including The Will to Believe) and argue that James' position is compatible with a realism about philosophical truth and does not require either voluntarism or a pragmatic theory of truth.