How to disprove free will using basic logic

[pariz]

Schopenhauer wrote the best thing I ever read about determinism ( a theory to which I feel inclined). Now, before you tell me that the quantum theory wasn't postulated when he wrote this and blah blah blah, just let me tell you that I don't care about it. I believe that the theory that defends the existence of infinital quantity of universes, and more so, the "logical" problems extracted out of that theory are plain stupid... A product of a ridiculous deduction that's been supported year after year based on a quantum empirical fact (that may or may have not yet been fully understood).
Anyway, what I intended to defend was the idea that we may do "what we will" but we cannot decide the nature of that "will" cause if fact, that's what we are. Time and space (and cause effect) are the "ground" in which the Will manifest itself (by Will, in a ontologic sense, we should understand the real being, regardless of how it appears in time and space).

Pff... this is hard to explain in little sentences, in a second language and hey, when you talk about this kind of things people tend to get defensive because the implications of such affirmations collide with the cosmovision each of us have of the world (and therefore affects us because we are defined to ourselves by the place we understand we occupy in the world we represent to ourselves). This is just as sensitive as religion because it affects the very same things.

My opinion: what we do is already written by a beingless writer in a paper called law of cause effect. There's no way in the world a subjective being or a group of them can mathematically predict in all extent what will happen because the variables are infinite and our methodoly and tools imperfect. Therefore, our sense of freedom is guaranteed. As rational beings, we have a saying in what we do, but that rationality does not scape the very same laws of the physical world (cause effect or even a quantum law if you please).