Forget people. Let's suppose we're all robots. Free will means our actions depend at least partially on our internal state; that is, our internal state can some

Forget people. Let's suppose we're all robots. Free will means our actions depend at least partially on our internal state; that is, our internal state can somehow influence our actions (the opposite is terrifying: being able to watch your actions but having no meaningful input on them). With this definition, free will is perfectly compatible with determinism (this is called compatibilism [0]). It's also compatible with probabilistic theories like quantum mechanics or every other branch of physics. It's like in chess. If you are running an algorithm that plays chess, you will just play the moves mindlessly, so no free will right? Except that per my definition your internal state is influencing your moves, so, you are free (in this sense). But there are situations where you're forced into a move. For example, the king is in check, there is only one move possible, then this move is forced. It's precisely in this forced case where there is no free will: you are being compelled to move by forces beyond your internal state. "Forced" moves can have some shades of gray in chess as well. For example, you may be forced to sacrifice a piece to defend the Queen, because sometimes the game is just lost if you don't do so. So.. the rules of the games allow you do to something else, but you can't meaningfully choose if we suppose you're playing for winning. And, of course, you can only play legal moves: some board states have few legal moves left so you're comparatively less free. In those cases, you have your free will partially constrained. [0] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/