Libertarian free will is a logical impossibility. If any given decision is not contingent on any previous decision or action, then it is uncaused and thus can not have occurred. If it is contingent on a previous decision or action, then it is not truly free as there were determining factors. Consider the question: Was a choice someone made based on something else, either previous knowledge or other choices? If so, then your choice is contingent and thus is not free unless these other choices were somehow not contingent themselves. However, these other causes might have themselves been caused by something else, which might have been caused, and so on. Since their can not have been an infinite number of caused choices or actions in a finite period of time as this would imply an infinite regress, free will must be false. If the choice was not based on anything else, then it is uncaused and thus could not have occurred. It is also possible that a decision was made randomly, or that the universe is stochastic in nature. This would however, preclude free will as this randomness is itself a cause of the action or decision.

**Does free will exist and does it matter?** • [Free will](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/) is the idea that we have control over our actions and choices. For thousands of years, the existence of free will has been hotly contested in philosophical debate. • Many philosophers, such as [Augustine](https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20005783.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Aba9da06fe269e6245f6323a492d2c935), have argued that free will exists and is a vital part of human nature. They use personal experience as evidence for the existence of free will - we experience a sense of agency, ‘make’ our own choices, and feel as if we are in control of our decisions. • [Compatibilists](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/), such as Thomas Aquinas, believe in both free will _and_ determinism, arguing for their logical compatibility. • Other schools of thought argue against the possibility of free will. [Causal determinism](https://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/dfwFischer2.html) states that all of our ‘decisions’ react to previous decisions, and therefore are not free as they are tied to determining factors. • Many contemporary psychologists and social scientists believe that whether or not free will exists, we must all be held as [morally responsible](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/apr/27/the-clockwork-universe-is-free-will-an-illusion) for our actions in order for society to function successfully.

Arguing that we don't have free will is a lot like arguing that "evil" isn't real. Free will isn't a... object. It's a perception. And yes, we perceive to have free will. We make decisions. We deliberate. We change our minds. The fact that we live in a deterministic universe isn't incompatible with the practical qualities of what we call "free will" because we don't have great predictive power. If this changes, and we can literally predict someone's actions deterministically, yeah, then you can start talking about the fall of free will.