Maybe the term, free will, is an oxymoron. An action free of cause would logically also be free of effect and the premise of will is to affect. We are a small part of nature's process of selection.

Possibly the more interesting discussion would be where the concept comes from.

Western culture has a significant monotheistic influence. That all-knowing being, seeing and judging our every action. Which grants us the ability to chose to do right, or wrong. How much have we seriously unpacked that?

Logically a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we fell. The fact we are aware, rather than the details of which we are aware.

Knowledge is a process of distinction and judgement that would be immaterial to the absolute.

The father figure lawgiver is a useful social contruct, but conflating the aspirational with the elemental is a serious logical fallacy. People come to think their beliefs are beyond question.

Also, good and bad are not some cosmic duel between the forces of righteousness and evil, but the basic biological binary of beneficial and detrimental. The 1/0 of sentience. When we apply such a black and white view to complex situations, the effect is often not productive.

As for determinism, time is not just some narrative flow, of the present moving past to future, that we experience as mobile organisms navigating our environment, but change turning future to past. Tomorrow becomes yesterday, because the earth turns. So there is no literal "dimension" of time, because the past is consumed by the present, to inform and drive it. Cause becomes effect.

Consequently the act of determination can only occur as the present.

That we don't seem in control of our immediate motor functions is simply due to all the mental clutter interfering with response times. The executive function of the mind is to process information, in order that future actions are better informed.