This article by a research scientist fits my view of free will. Not Libet's > > https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-are-implications-free-will-debate-indiv... problem for me is Mele he is erudite and a compatibilist.-As your fits my view of free will seems to indicate. James described compatibilism as a quagmire of evasion and Kant as a wretched subtefuge; both believed in free will.-Alfed Mele a few years ago took a grant (4 M$) from the Templeton Foundation to study free will. He was a compatibilist back then and remains one now it seems.-That our wills might be determined by quantum phenomena or more classical phenomena does not change the fact they are caused by these events. If our wills are actually acausal, this might explain alot but it makes a complete nonsense of the concept of free will. And this for me is why the concept of free will is non sequitur. -This I find an equally compelling view.