How much "free will" do we *really* have?

[redchartreuse]

Pre-Incarnate decisions made by Higher Self to bring about the desired outcome for the incarnation.
"Programming" by parents/teachers/society "pressure"/media
Biological microbes you mention, as well as chemicals in food/water/medications
State of mental health
4th Density entities offering their "service" to us, consisting of temptations.

Right, exactly.  All this, and more.  So in consideration of all these other (often unseen and unacknowledged) influences on our beliefs and behavior, how much actual "free will" do we really have?  Seems like not much to me.

I tend to agree with this. I've found the need to "fight" to overcome things in my life that were contrary to the highest version of myself that I wish to be. No one can/will fight this battle for me. I fight to overcome in total cooperation with Creator (having stated my intention to walk the Positive path). I disagree with philosophy that tells me not to oppose/resist what I don't wish to remain attached to my life. I wish to be "free" to choose, and can't be free if I continually allow some sort of "pressure" to overcome my personal goals.

Yes.  I can't really speak for others, but in my own experience some of my greatest gains in growth were earned by actively resisting those beliefs and behaviors which were automatic.  Which leads me to wonder if so many of us have drunk a highly watered-down "Kool-Aid" version of Ra's philosophy of growth through acceptance, or if even perhaps Ra themselves have persisted in their grand naivety even to this day.

I tend to think it's the former, but I'm really not so sure.  To my read, Ra's touting of "acceptance" is much more akin to "acknowledgment" rather than "approval" but I don't feel that I am anywhere in the majority with this view among LOO students.  In other words, I can "accept" that feeling anger is a part of my emotional makeup as a human being, but that doesn't mean I will achieve growth by simply succumbing to it, and taking whatever actions my anger suggests in the heat of the moment.

And yet, it seems that so many people appear to believe that permitting themselves to be yanked around the playing field by their capricious and incongruent emotional natures is the same thing as exercising their free will.

I feel that I don't "own" myself if I can constantly be led away from my goal by whatever method the negative attempts to apply against me. If something/someone has control/influence over my inner self, how can I claim to ownership?

Me too.  Where this often gets sticky is in situations where somebody else is allowing themselves to be constantly led astray from their own goals (or oftentimes goals that we both share and have discussed) and yet tend to view me as their adversary when attempting to steer them back toward their/our own previously stated desires.

The yellow-ray blockages in human societies are so thick that they sometimes seem nearly impervious to me.  It often seems easier to herd a clowder of cats, than to get a group of human beings to work together toward even the simplest of goals.  In my experience, often times the most unifying thing I see in group behavior is how people are so willing to set their differences aside and attack somebody the moment it is brought into question whether or not the group is actually progressing toward their stated goal, or whether they are just spinning their wheels patting each other on the backs, while actually accomplishing very little.