Under your first definition, I'm not sure I am a determinist. Under the second, I think I am. Since most professional philosophers are compatibalists, you can't really have a definition of determinism that entails incompatibalism. Maybe the definition doesn't though.
Sounds like you aren't familiar with compatibalism, as Mr Berkshire and other atheists have explained, compatabilsts simply redefine free will to be "
nothing impeding you from carrying out your un-free will".
There is no such thing as a compatabalist who believes they can freely choose.How can it not follow? Well, it doesn't as far as I can see. The burden is on you to show that it does. Try to formalize it if you want to me to tell you exactly where I think you're going wrong.
lol,
A. it follows, period, this is exactly what determinism is.
B. You should take a listen to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUBgBeNLk-w you'll hate it, but it's your professed view (determinism)
I'm precisely the kind of determinist you think I sound like. It's called compatibalism.
You sound like one of those incompatibalists who haven't read much more than dictionaries on the topic of determinism and free will :-p
lol, sorry to do this to you but you simply are not working with the real definitions.
again, compatabalist free will is
nothing impeding you from carrying out your un-free will You'll find no compatabalist that will claim free will is the ability to freely choosesounds like you under the false impression that compatabalism is everything LFW is, just minus the theism?
Nothing continually amazes me more than atheists who don't believe determinism is true. How can you possibly reject the core of your world view?