I have spent lot of years mainly figuring out what myself and this reality is all about.

The fact is that you can choose. Even what is not your preferred option.

without violating the definition of "will"

your will cannot take action or willfully withhold action without motive

you're conflating "the best option you can imagine"

with

"the best real option available to you in the moment"

And what is the definition of will? According to you?

I never disagreed with this. I am saying it free to do one or the other.

will can never be free from desire

intentional goal seeking in service of desire

will can never be free from desire

I never disagreed with this.

will can never be free from desire

I never disagreed with this.

ipso facto, no such thing as a "free-will"

I said it was still free to choose regardless of them.

it is impossible to choose something freely

if your will is goal seeking

There are always more than one goal. So yes, it can choose freely.

and you must always choose the one you think is the best at that juncture

Why MUST you?

one option must always be prefered

What about having motives means one must be preferred over the other?

Not to mention what you said does not follow logically.

do you think it is fair to say that when you have a goal, this limits, this constrains your active options ?

and within the scope of the options (including non-action) each has apparent pros and cons ?

so, let's imagine you've narrowed down the selection to two distinct options that seem roughly equivalent

do you go with your "gut-instinct" (intuitive biology + subconscious experience) ?

or do you have conscious intentional REASONS for selecting one action over the other ?

OR

do you select essentially AT RANDOM ?

one option must always be prefered

otherwise

you could never choose one

Why can't all three be options that you freely choose?

Do we agree that free will is a cause and not an effect?

When a cause that is not free causes it must cause what it is most inclined towards.

so when the free will chooses it is the person choosing.

This free cause must also be intelligent

But he is free regarding his choice of responding to his influences.

He is was not free as regards him being sick. But he was free to choose how to responded to it.

you cannot use the word "choosing" to describe your process of the will determining

you cannot use the word "choosing" to describe your process of the will determining

are you suggesting your will does not make decisions ?

what exactly is your will "free" from ?

and if something is logically-impossible

it follows

that it can never be considered "a cause"

if the "free-will" is unconstrained by "self" also known as "identity" also known as "biology + experience"

then NO

the "free-will" is NOT "the person"

This free cause must also be intelligent

please explain