Free will is a concept that seems relatively simple in definition, but becomes a vastly complex concept when under the microscope. Part of the reason the issues seem to get complicated is that most of the time the argument is being made between pure free will and absolute determinism, the opposing notion that everything is predetermined by an external entity or force. This false dilemma has worked over time to spark efforts to better define free will (Richards, 142). Free will has numerous implications that cause it to be viewed in various, and sometimes contradictory, angles. Such angles include scientific, religious, and legal. While efforts of study in these areas are undoubtedly conducted under the inspiration of proving free will or not, it seems as if it’s a step ahead of the issue, as the argument isn’t around the existence of the base concept of free will, but the complicated implications of it working within a religious or scientific system. Holding free will to pragmatic issues and real life situations instead of hypotheticals and thought experiments yield a result that proves we are somewhere in-between free will and hard determinism, as there are things we know we can choose, but also things we know we can’t.