A good one.
Alright, how are we defining free will? I would say a good definition is, "The ability for a rational being to use the intellect to decide particular action out of a choice of actions without the entirety of the choice being detemined by past causes."
My main issue is the bold part. Let me know if something is confusing.
I have to hop down to see some people before the Vigil Mass tonight, but I would highly recommend to you the work of the
atheist philosopher and neuroscientist Raymond Tallis, and his work "Aping Mankind," which has some very good defenses of good will.
No Catholic Theologian believes are free will is exercised independent of past causes. That is a contradiction in terms because we are beings of contingency, philosophically speaking. Mortal, human free will is exercised in the realm of secondary causality, not primary.
This is one reason why Dante once called art the "grandson of God," because while we are the Sons of God, we procreate, craft and build based upon causalities and occurrences that predate even our very existence. We are free in the context of a particular metaphysical instantiation that is called the here-and-now.
Let's keep talking about this! Because there are a lot of people, especially in neuroscience, who are trying to deny free will, with disastrous consequences to everything from law, art, medicine, and addiction therapy.