Why God doesn't stop satan?

[R00tKiT]

Free will is like God only in one way -- they both are so ill-defined that a rational discussion about them is impossible.

Definitions:

Free-Will = uncaused action

This one is likely impossible, but even if it were possible, it would be a purely random event.  It would not imply agency of any type.  If a god makes uncaused choices, it is literally tossing unknowable dice for a living.

Free-Will = ability for agency

This one I will accept, but what is agency?

Agency = the ability to recognize the self and the world, and make purposeful choices.  One can argue that even plants have agency, but I am going to focus on human agency.

Under this definition, we all have free will, but it is not uncaused.  Uncaused actions are merely random.  Agency seems to require a higher-order state than simple input->output.  It seems to require a re-entrant state.

Re-entrant states are interesting because their behavior over time cannot be predicted perfectly.  They become, to some degree, their own cause.  Logic and mathematics become incomplete when they allow self-reference (Godel's incompleteness theorem).  Chaos theory is based on re-entrant states.  I read an article about a Quantum Mechanics paper that says that re-entrant states become resistant to quantum noise -- essentially partially sustaining their own causality.

So, no, I don't need a God to have Free Will, and I don't need freedom from causality to have Free Will.

I don't see how we can have free will if we aren't free of causality. Everything in my physical body follows very precise biological processes and chemical reactions, where exactly is the room for free will ? What specific area in the brain, if any, would you label as a free will area ?

I couldn't find anything about what you call re-entrant states, apart from some concept in computer programming, so I would ask if you could elaborate. 

Besides,  even if there is really a random component in our behavior, then it could be due to some currently unknown factor, how can we rule this out?

---

And six month ago, I told you that this is exactly my position : that everything is designed, including snowflakes and rocks.

*bursts out laughing* That's such an absurd position to hold that I'm intensely glad to be a non-believer.

In what way it's absurd? Rocks and snowflakes are maybe useless to you, but that's it. What makes usefulness to human beings a criterion to discern between designed and undesigned objects. Let me guess : you only consider something to be designed if it's designed by human beings... well, bingo, you are begging your position, you're already excluding nature from the definition of design.