>>17815929
There's no absolute metaphysics of free will or anything else. If you look under a microscope, it doesn't exist, but neither do human beings. The simplest way to understand free will is it's part of the definition of a human.

What is a human exactly? Most agree humans are living things with great size and intelligence. Unlike the majority of life (single cells) humans have vast physical powers. Containing tens of trillions of cells, each human is like a nation of lesser things. For that reason, maybe it's wrong to talk about people as individuals, but nonetheless the body appears to move and act as one. That's our current definition of human, an individual human body. Presupposing humans exist, what else do you call the behavior of such an enormous system, if not free will? Why did humans grow so strong and so intelligent, if not to make decisions and take action? Disbelief in free will requires a moral equivalency between humans and single celled organisms, both equally at the mercy of fate.
Individuality is contingent on free will.

The question of whether individuality exists, and to what extent (what is a "bloodline"?) is more interesting.

>>17815942
>>17816383
relevant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4arOKZvuZK4