My argument revolves around how we think of 'free will' in the first place. An etiological argument sounds compelling when you consider it from a ‘bystander’, overall societal or political perspective. However, when we perceive ‘free will’ as our own means of the contribution to the society, the chain reverses where you see your purpose driving the impacts in your own life and others, even on the greater level when the same thought process is aligned.
When we see cause as our purpose and effect as our impact, we get rid of that unsettling feeling because the origination in theory then becomes something we are comfortable with. The purpose allows you to act on free will. Of course the unfolding of events is inevitable, but free will’s premise was never based on certain turn of events in the first place. It relies on uncertainty, curiosity and unattained wisdom.