I myself am not any sort of expert on the topic, I present only casual interest, so everyone is competent enough to participate in the discussion.
Just saying~

Now, I assume at least some of you have wondered by now, what even determinism is. I am sure you could go on and on about it for whole pages, yet I prefer shortening it to lenght of one sentence. It's a philosophical theory stating that everything is determined by something else that has happened beforehand (I think you can go full butterfly effect here), even moral choices of our own consciousnesses.
Naturally, there cannot exist free will in such model... but is that really the case? Well, as with everything in philosophy and similliar, there are special names for views for every possible combination of multiple statements. The ones used in determinism-free will debate are "Is determinism true?" and "Is free will possible?". This breaks everything down into four conceptions, which can be grouped into two thesis of a bit wider range.
The first one of those "wider" ones is incompatibility. As the name suggests, it assumes free will and determinism are not compatible with each other. The three subunits of this category are as follows: hard determinism, metaphysical libertarianism — this one's bound to have the best name — and hard incompatibilism. It is actually pretty simple (well, except for the last one). Hard determinism says determinism is real therefore free will may not be possible, metaphysical libertarianism the opposite. The third one is a bit weirder, as it states that free will just cannot exists, whether deterministic thougt is right or not.
But hey, there were three positions mentioned there, what about the fourth? Well, it's compatibilism, opposite of hard incompatibilism, stating that wether really everything we do is predetermined, or at least caused by something we don't have any control over, free will is at least possible.