Which philosophers are you referring to? I'm currently reading Richard Taylor. See the chapter "Freedom and Determinism" in his book Metaphysics. He develops a theory of agency after rejecting both determinism and indeterminism (or causeless randomness). I agree with you that free will is real.

I think that you are on a right track, but only partly. You are right in that consciously experiencing yourself free makes you really free, no matter what are the hypothetical subconscious brain mechanics. But, I would say, the statement of own freedom is rather negative than positive. Not "I have a personal perspective", but "there is nothing in the (given) world, including my own personality, what/who has determined my decision".

The problem is that writing something does not have to come from experiencing what it is supposed to express, even when the writer believes it does. There are well-known experiments where people report forming intention to move their finger well after the muscles already contracted to move it. So no, this is well-known to be an unpromising idea regardless of whether "free will" is real or not.

@Conifold: I know those experiments pretty well but I would argue that initiating moving your hand can indeed be done by any robot but initiating writing a sentence about your consciousness which turns out to be true is more plausibly attributed to the consciousness itself than to deeper levels which aren't conscious.

There is no principal difference (in respect to the question of free will), for me, between stirring a finger by a tick (say) and writing the sentence you have put. So it cannot be an argument. The truth is that I'm free (that isn't quite the same as free "will") even at tick, or when I jerk my arm away from very hot water.

How would such a proof change your life?

@DanChristensen: How would an answer to your question change yours? ;-)

@vonjd You seem to be working under the presumption that you are your "conscious mind". Could that presumption be wrong?

@HWalters: I would argue that my consciousness is the only thing that I can really be sure about. It wouldn't make sense to state that something else is experiencing my consciousness.

@vonjd I think you misunderstood. There are a lot of things you may wish to claim are part of who you are. The notion that you are your conscious mind requires all of those things to be conscious. E.g., the presumption that if you didn't "consciously" originate an intention, then "you" didn't originate the intention, presumes that you are your conscious mind. I'm not questioning consciousness or the fact that you're experiencing it; I'm questioning your presumption that what you are conscious of equates to you.

@vonjd I doubt that it would change anything. Your turn.

@HWalters: True, the question is where to draw the line. I think that it is plausible to argue that at least true statements about our conscious experience ultimately originate from our consciousness and not from the unconscious layers beneath.

@vonjd Why is the question of free will an important one? Is it mostly a theological consideration?

@DanChristensen: I am an atheist, if this is what you are getting at. But I am still interested in the ontological status of free will and consciousness because those are still big mysteries - and I love to know the truth (I guess this is the reason why most people are here...)

Writing sentences about consciousness, or any other topic, is done by computers all the time, they are, after all just strings of symbols.

@vonjd @vonjd If you knew what you were going to do with the answer (either way), it might clarify the question for you. Would it, for example, inform your decisions on moral issues? If so, how?