Kant takes a free will to be a being or substance with the power to cause a state of the world (or a whole series of such states) spontaneously or from itself.

Empiricist philosophy always tends to be anti-philosophy (and is often proud of it).

What are we to think of the shortsightedness of the great mass of people who are content to do nothing about it, and even worse, the greed or venality of the rich and powerful who deliberately bar the way to human survival?

That Hegel's theory is derivative from Fichte's does not prevent it from being strikingly original and of independent value.

We are generally forced to choose one way or the other of distancing ourselves from Kant. I suppose I tend to choose the irreligious way. But I regret that Kant's path has not been followed.

In any matter of moral importance, our first task, before we plunge ahead and decide what to do, is to figure out what we ought to do.

We can establish empirical criteria for free actions, and investigate human actions on the presupposition we are free.