One step back please, the "free will" was an ill-conceived start. The core claim is about how random is human will. Throwing in the word "free" adds confusion.
The will of an addict is a bit less random, okay. Is there anything quantitative going on here besides "some stuff can increase randomness" and "some other stuff can decrease randomness"?
My claim is that randomness is a dead end. It's irrelevant. But I do think free will can be a useful concept (with little relationship to randomness), although it's too complicated for a short comment I think (a complex quantification of how you can realize good things for yourself and the world).
That said, I think this is a nice experiment exactly for surfacing this kind of questioning.
The will of an addict is a bit less random, okay. Is there anything quantitative going on here besides "some stuff can increase randomness" and "some other stuff can decrease randomness"?