"Free Will" do exist

Sorry for not having too much text on the previous round, for I was sick. Though, I don't want Con to wait too much, so, I "force" myself to rebut, even when I do not feel well. Anyway, let me just give my point again in a very detail manner, as how Con did in Round 1. I admit that some of my statements were not that "clear", so, let us just start from the beginning. Free Will, by definition, "Free will is the ability of agents to make choices free from certain kinds of constraints. In philosophy, the constraint of dominant concern has been nomological determinism, the notion that the past and the present dictate the future entirely and necessarily, that every occurrence results inevitably from prior events. However, many others define free will without reference to determinism, and posit that freedom from other types of constraints is more relevant, such as physical constraints (e.g. chains or imprisonment), social constraints (e.g. threat of punishment or censure), or mental constraints (e.g. compulsions or phobias, neurological disorders, or genetic predispositions)." - Wikipedia. Free will do have many point of views from different fields like religion, politics, science, etc. However, let us take it in general. On my point of view, "Free will" is the ability to think freely, despite of the "limitations" we have. Now, to understand why free will exist, let us understand why some does not believe in it: Let us just based on Con: "C.1 All acts are causally determined or random leaving no room for free-will Determined acts are acts brought about by the laws of causality and nature. Each action has a reaction/affect leading to other actions and so on. So one such pseudo-choice would be simply brought about by previous reactions in your body, brain and externally that you had no control over. Even conscious events would be included in this causal process. For example, evaluating what burger to buy could have many conscious but still causal influences. One thought leads to another after all. Causality entails inevitability. One accumulation of effects must result in one single possible reaction and so on." That is the usual response, but not all people are "chained" in the "action/reaction" effect. Also, they still have the choice, decisions to make. One reason why people does not believe in free will is because, they do believe in "predestined future". I believe it, too, in some point. But, we are talking about choices and decision, and there is free will. We have "limitations", like "predestined future", but despite of that, we still have the free will. For free will does not affect our future. From the word itself, "will", meaning, it is what you want, but it does not affect our future unless actions are taken, and even if actions are taken, sometimes, our will won't happen if "interference" will come. Still, that does not take our free will. "C.2 Free-will is an incoherent concept" From my own definition, "Free will is the ability to think, despite of the limits we have." I apply it to all the field like Religion and Politics. Religion/faith(Christianity): I can blaspheme God whenever I want even when I am a Christian, but, I cannot change the fact that I will go to hell when I blaspheme Him (Just an example) I have the ability to think anything about God, but it does not change my "fate", that is where "limitation" comes. Politics: Simple as defying the law, but I cannot change the fact that I will be imprisoned for it. "C.3 "Choices" are shown to be made before the agent is conscious of them" You still have the control over it. For example, I have to decide a course: Accountancy or Entrepreneurship. Sometimes, one of them may "pop" on my mind, but before taking it, I still have the control to decide or "re-decide" before taking an action. Second, some "pop out" thoughts are not even wanted, they just simply "pop" in your mind.