Agreed. It's one of those things _so_ often glossed over: We
   know as much as we know, and then make a strong assumption about
   the rest, declaring, "Therefore, no free will". or "Therefore,
   free will".

   But the ambiguity remains. I see no other decent recourse but to
   accept both as equally true/false enough and/or/both as
   equivalent.

   It's not a "clean" position to hold. Even myself, I felt the
   need to "choose" for pragmatic reasons. But even then, strip
   away the pragmatism and really, whichever one chooses, does not
   negate the other one in any way because we _don't_ have enough
   information and it's unlikely we -can- ever have enough
   information. The only distinction one can do would be that of
   pragmatic/practical reasons. *Why* is someone choosing one over
   the other and going through elaborate justifications for their
   position. _that's_ something that can be debated. But an
   absolute, "Yes/No True/False" to Free Will/No Free Will? it's a
   political/religious choice.