Or maybe to add, again, the freedom here involves the following:
If in any situation an agent choses A over B, this is an exercise of will. That will is "free" if the choice is indeterminant - in other words it could have been that the agent chose B over A - all other things being equal. This works only if the decision was random because we assume the agent must have chosen A over B rather than B over A for some reason, X.
In this case X is the causal variable because the presence of X caused our agent to choose A over B. But for the presence of X, the decision would have been different. Therefore, the agent DOES NOT have free will because X caused the decision. X may be a preferance for A over B. X may be the aquaintance with some facts regarding the superiority of A over B. X in turn could have a determined causal chain or be random.
If, however, most of the causal variables in decision making reside within an individual agent who by definition is different than any other agent in the same set of circumstances - then we can still judge behavior normatively as indicative of character even if that persons behavior is fully determined by causal variables. So Adam sinned, right:
Let Adams preference for the fruit be A
Let Adams deference for the fruit be B
Satan aquainted Adam with X, letting X be the promise of the knowledge of good and evil.
We say that because of X, Adam chose A over B. So X - the lie of Satan - was the cause of Adam's chosing A over B.
For Adam to have exercised free will then he would have had to be able to chose B over A despite X. Now the QUESTION is whether his response to X - the presence of which was beyond his control- is under Adam's control. This is nonsense, because people would offer
1. Adam could have had more trust in God.
2. Adam could have been more suspicious of the serpent.
But that's bunk. Adam, if he existed, was perfect to JW's. He had a perfect level of trust in God. If he didn't, only God is to blame since Adam at this point is ostensibly perfect. Furthermore, if he were perfectly rational, he would have a corresponding level of trust in God which was perfectly balanced to God's actions.
The best theology that could be gleaned here is that this sin revealed that they werre imperfect...and now knew it. This fits fine with some theologies, but not JW's.