http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/chap2_1_3.htm: The metaphysics of evolution
Much of the confusion in the Darwin debate is really a rehash of all the issues raised by Kant in his critiques of metaphysics: darwinism (and anti-darwinism) run into the three classic ones: the metaphysics of ‘soul’, of ‘free will’, and ‘divinity’. Study the Darwin debate and these three in various disguises constitute nearly the whole debate. And this confusion shows why a ‘theory’ of evolution is always a problem because it cannot even properly describe the ‘organism’ of man: what is it that evolved in fact?
The model of WHEE has a significant evidentiary construct that shows a form of the ‘evolution’ of ‘free will’. In fact something a little more elementary might be better: free agency. We can take that as the ‘power of choice’ which may be less than free will.
This is elemental reasoning: we frankenstein a beast with potential and then set it free. The macro effect shows an rough analog.
The evidence for that is: if something is to ‘evolve’ freedom it must be determinate in its induction of freedom: but this contradicts its own premise of creating free agency. The paradox is resolved in the ‘macro model’ in the way finite transitions (system action) alternate with ‘free action’, and this in turn is a clue to some of the most confusing aspects of world history. This does not prove the existence of free will, but we can at least see the way it is an actuality in formal observable terms–in world history.
There are other ways to resolve the contradiction: downscale free will to free agency (as above) and bring a third factor to the ‘contradiction’ or ‘dilemma’, i.e. ‘creative energy’ of the free agent is a state of innovation.