@FrankHubeny My view of free will is that, very strictly speaking, I don't know what the answer is. However, my default model, and one that I tend to believe in most situations, is that we have no libertarian free will, and that the concept of libertarian free will is (probably) incoherent.

In other words, I am a hardcore determinist. That grows out of my materialist/physicalist metaphysics. I allow some wiggle room for quantum mechanical effects, but I really don't understand that enough. For human actions in our world, I don't think quantum mechanical effects make any difference whatever, so our behaviors are just part of a causal chain.

I'm still not sure what I feel about compatibilism. I sort of see that the view is right, but I initially thought it was a bait and switch with the term "free will". I still kind of think that, but on the other hand see some value in it.

@Chelonian Thanks! I don't like the individualism associated with libertarian free will, nor the rational deliberative aspect of will, nor how it seemingly limits it to animals with a brain. I also agree with you about the quantum mechanical effects. That is, I don't agree with Balaguer and Kane. We don't get our free will from QM in the brain.

@HWalters I didn't understand your comment which is why I didn't respond yesterday. Best wishes.

Thanks for your responses, @FrankHubeny . Your view is more interesting than I had initially imagined. I'll have to follow up with some questions later, but at the moment I will have to put that aside.

@FrankHubeny Whoops, not sure if you can address a person in chat in the middle of a sentence, so let me repost that:

@Chelonian I got the ping even though it was in the middle of the sentence.

@FrankHubeny I should've realized the ping would work that way, thanks for letting me know. Anyway, back to philosophy: So, just to be clear, you don't think there is any physical world? This is something like Idealism? Are rocks "agents", in your use of that word? (the point is: Are there are any things that are not agents?). And are all agents--including animals without nervous systems--conscious, at least to some degree?

I must be a compatibilist, because I believe: 1. people can optionally choose whether or not to exercise free will within a framework of determinism. For example, from personal experience I know that I can choose either to go about my routine business almost completely on 'auto-pilot', with all the risks involved in doing so, or experience each moment mindfully with fully conscious decision-making.

In fact, as infants we are more subject to determinism, while learning more and more about our ability to act with free will as we grow and develop our minds. And 2. there are those thoughts and actions over which we have some degree of control, all the way up to full control; yet we are always subject to a particular framework of determinism within which we live and with which we must adapt ourselves. And 3. free will requires lots of practice. A lot of thought has to go into it.