Determinism, as meaning every choice is hard-coded, sounds very silly to me, and I don't see many people arguing for it.

I think my interpretation is still in line with the thinking behind determinism. That, the agency people feel in their choices is a farce, and really they are selecting from a limited set of options defined by the way their mind works. And that, in most cases, they will make predictable choices, whilst feeling they are choosing freely.

This is for sure probabilistic but I feel it keeps in line with the deterministic thinking that free choice is a farce

It seems like you mostly refute common arguments for why free will doesnt exist, as opposed to providing compelling arguments for why it does exist.

I personally think that possessing the ability to do otherwise doesn't imply free will exists, but that there is an inherent randomness to determinism. I see determinism as defining the likelihood of certain decisions being made, not necessarily what choice WILL be made. It defines the thought processes that lead to certain things being chosen over others.

I think that, free will exists according to your parameters, sure. But I don't really agree with your parameters. But this then just comes down to, what does free will even mean? Its a semantic debate, and I remain completely convinced its entirely a semantic debate based on that article.

Good read though.

I'm starting to feel that these discussions are meaningless, due to the nature of such words meaning different things to different people. You can only really prove free will or determinism is correct according to what you define them as. Such terms are so hard to pin down..

I also appreciate that this is written in a way so that it can be understood by those who aren't academic vermin. Nice to read a philosophy post without the pretentious wank.

The hospital bed scene in End of Evangelion is a reference to Georges Bataille