If free will was not real

[The Grand Nudger]

We are using different definitions.  I think you are calling "will" what I call "intent."  I'm using this definition of will: the capacity to manifest intent outside the agent.  So I want my leg to move, and it moves.  Between my formation of the intent to move, and the actual moving, I call will.

With all this translation being needed back and forth, I have a growing suspicion that we'll ultimately arrive at a description of free will that isn't particularly free, or willful..even if you choose to call it that.   

Okay, I've fine moving forward with your definition, but you haven't defined "will" yet, and aren't using my definition.  I'd say "No matter how hard I intent it, I cannot fly, because the will is incapable of manifesting that intent."

If you'd rather my criticism refer to intent, then so be it, but good luck with will as you define it, when intent is under the bus.  Your definition of will specifically referenced it. The terms are redundant in context, and as such all questions and criticisms of one apply equally to the other.

I'm kind of mystified why you would choose to define will in such a way as that my inability to fly could be taken to mean that I do not have the will to fly, or perhaps even will.