However, our ability to change those patterns is still constrained by our biology and our environment.
Absolutely. This is why I use the phrase "partial free will".
And this is a perfectly reasonable belief (unfalsifiable) but it is important to remember that indeterminism is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM RANDOM.
I think that may be true to a certain extent. I do not think a choice is free will. A decision is more difficult. No decision is made in a vacuum. This is where randomness comes into play. You have to be exposed to different ideas all the time. For instance, when I click on "Religion" and first see all the new Religion thread subjects. No part of me knows what these will be, especially my first day on DebateArt. For me, those threads were random --- less so as I stayed on the forum day after day. But still . . . As I began to read random ideas that were not my own, they mixed with the complexity of ideas and influences in my own brain. The combination of "RANDOM" and my existing "DETERMINISTIC" attitudes, caused things to change in me, possibly indelibly.
This is how I define my identity. So yes, randomness plays a huge role. But I see free will a little differently. I see it as a script. I use the same programs that biology gave me (desires, needs, etc. . .) to force feed repetitive "experiences" that I create into my own system. In this way, I "partially control" my own associations (my wine example). I no longer just allow natural "experience" to be my only programmer. This decision still has a cause, but I think self-programmer is better than saying "no free will" at all. Randomness is still involved, along with cause, but I get to make a decision like "read everything I get my hands on" in order to learn and become a better self-programmer.
A little naive maybe, but I already know how little control we have --- as biological, electrically-neuron-controlled people. :) So I spend my time looking for loop-holes.
