Determinism, Free Will and Paradox

[Mudhammam]

And what evidence do you see for the idea of philsophical determinism? The fact that every time you've gone back in time, things played out the same way again and again? No. It is because you cannot imagine a mechanism for free will that you discard it and choose determinism as the source of human activity. It's an argument from incredulity, and it implies determinism, so here we are.

Rather I find no sensible alternative to logical necessity which as far as I can tell, so long as A must precede B, and B must follow A, and B must precede C, and C must follow B, etc.---granted there is any motion, the present state follows necessarily from the preceding one.

You are content to claim that current state arises out of past states which do not exist. And yet, you are not willing to contend that the current state arises out of a need to reach a future state, which also does not exist (according to you).

Teleology is nothing new. I'm not sure why all of sudden you think change is directed by anything other than the present conditions.

"The past and future state, in determinism, are equally sure, equally-well defined, and equally identified with the current moment. So why this past-time bias? Why are you so sure that this "arrow of time" is something the universe is DOING, rather than just a change in perspective?

A past-time bias? As in there is historical information that presently exists which allows us to traverse the past through the subsequent events that determined the present, and which also permits us to predict the future in terms of events likely to happen (as they haven't yet occurred, as in the case of the past, and aren't presently occurring, as in now)? I don't understand how that is a "bias" other than the fact that what is real takes place in reality, and "the future," so long as it is never reached, does not and has not.