It is more plausible that Free Will exists, than Determinism

Casuality in Determinism does not dis-prove Free WillHow free are our actions? Are the 'choices' we make really choices, or were we destined to choose the same thing no matter what options presented themselves? I hope to answer this question throughout the debate. Through a libertarian belief system, one might say that everything we do is a choice made of our own desire. Of course it is not so simple as that, as a determinist can easily counter that by saying the choice in question was made for a reason based on past events, and that our desires our based on past events and circumstances. In fact, any hypothetical that can be made can also be countered by a determinist as being a decision based on prior events. This terminology is most often referred to by determinists as "Causation". "Causal determinism is, roughly speaking, the idea that every event is necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature." (1)Because this line of reasoning is so strong with determinism, it is applied to most every argument. Those who argue for causal determinism can almost seem like the little kid you went to pre-school with, that always said "Nuh uh" to everything you said. But it's not entirely baseless. In fact it would be silly to say that the decision you make at any point in time isn't based on some prior reasoning. What libertarianists seek to argue, however, is that we are still free to make choices as we will despite prior influences. The word "freedom" does not mean "freedom from causality or materialism", it means "freedom from compulsion or restraint". Thus, if will exists, it can exert its influences through causal relations. Causality provides constraints, not unfreedom. Gravity limits the conditions under which a person can fly, but it does not prevent flying. The causal sequences by which nerve stimulation results in muscular action give the will the freedom to manifest itself in the world. (2)Prior reasoning can certainly influence a decision, but to emphatically say that it is the sole reason is where the flaw begins. A) The Randomness (Freedom) RequirementsIn order for randomness (in this context Freedom) to work against causality, there are several requirements that need be in effect to satisfy libertarians, that show it is far from un-intelligible. These requirements also act as the building theory of evidence behind the justification of free will. -Chance Exists. The essential argument being that the outcome of an event can be a diverse as the unknown variables when rolling dice. Epicurus was influenced strongly by Aristotle, who regarded chance as a fifth cause. He said there must be cases in which the normally straight paths of atoms in the universe occasionally bend a little and the atoms "swerve" to prevent the universe and ourselves from being completely determined by the mechanical laws of Democritus. (3)- Indeterminism must be trueIndeterminism, being a failure of one of the determinism's. This being a requirement to fulfill a libertarian's belief. Indeterminism for some philosophers is an event without a cause (4)-Our actions can be un-predictable While it is easy to imagine a world where the three faculties of reason - perception, conception, and comprehension- are viewed deterministically, and quantum events do not interfere with normal operations. But such a thing called quantum noise throws the equation into question, quantum noise being able to introduce random errors into a persons stored memories. This quantum noise effectively is able to create random associations of ideas during memory recall. (5)A simple example is a dream. A dream that is created purely of ones own subconcious that can sometimes change or distort memories, which can in turn add a level of uncertainty or unpredictableness to a decision. -Our actions are up to usAlso commonly referred to as moral autonomy, that we are each individually held responsible for actions. Analytic Philosopher John Locke summarizes the word analogy of free will, where "free" applies to the agent, and not the "will", which belongs to the mind. The debate between Philosophers Aristotle and Epicurus comes to Epicurus's questioning of future events. "A future event could not be fated and logically necessitated unless the causes of that event are already present." (6)-There are alternative possibilitiesQuite simply, that there are alternate possibilities that for determinists are different changes to causality chains, linking to different pre-determined actions. Harry Frankfurt's principle of alternate possibilities states "a person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise.” (7)-Causal Chains Causal Chains or 'Casua Sui' is the idea that a quantum event can play a role in creating a new chain of events. A quantum mechanical event is initially only one atomic (or subatomic) particle that is here rather than there, or events that do or do not occur - unpredictably. (8)-Creativity We humans create works of art, mathematical principles, the very essence of ideas, even ideas that form philosophies like determinism. Fundamentally, philosophy seems to be a derivative of free will that can't be refuted even on a sub-atomic level. It is through the basic fundamentals that libertarianism is justified. I will attempt to refute the determinist view of causal chains, through logical principles based around the requirements of free will. It is my view that the easy argument of "This only happened because of this" Seems to be at it's very core, a flawed argument. Unless the very specific root cause for any action can ultimately be determined by the third party observer, it seems naturally ignorant to discredit any possibility for uncertainty in any morally autonomous choice. To dis-reagard un-predictability in the equation of any logical argument, there needs to be a solid proof presented that demonstrates why someone could not have acted any other way even when presented with multiple choices. I will end my opening arguments here, and stand-by for my opponents response. Good luck!1. https://plato.stanford.edu...2. http://www.benbest.com...3. http://www.informationphilosopher.com...4. http://www.informationphilosopher.com...5. http://www.informationphilosopher.com...6. http://www.informationphilosopher.com...7. http://www.informationphilosopher.com...8. http://www.informationphilosopher.com...