I've written a lot about free will over the years, arguing for good reason that it doesn't exist.
(You can find those posts by searching my blogs for "free will" in the Google search box in the right sidebar.)
Here's a great concise argument against free will in the form of a letter to the editor in a recent issue of New Scientist.
Published 9 June 2021
From Adrian Bowyer, Foxham, Wiltshire, UK
A number of people quoted in the article on the hypothesis of quantum superdeterminism criticise it by saying it would make free will untenable (15 May, p 36).
Setting aside that this criticism confuses the desirable with the real, free will doesn’t need determinism (quantum or otherwise) to make it untenable. All it needs is logic.
Every event must be caused by one or more preceding events, be spontaneous or result from both. The two categories – caused and spontaneous – are disjoint, complemental and together universal; there can be no other sort of event instigator.
Thought is a parallel and sequential collection of events. If they are all caused, then there is no free will. If some are spontaneous, then there is still no free will: a spontaneous event is, by definition, not willed.