Overwhelming Freedom

In both an amoral and moral sense, the freedom to choose beliefs and bodily actions is not necessarily welcomed by everyone.  An irrationalist might want the myth of not being at fault for embracing their delusions to be true.  A person still does not have to be a selfish, emotionalistic, asinine irrationalist to be alarmed by the idea of free will.  Whether I like it or not, I have free will, without which I would not be capable of knowing anything because my worldview would be determined by forces beyond my control.  I could know the intrinsic truth of logical axioms and the fact that I exist as a consciousness with absolute certainty even if I had never discovered any of the other truths that follow by necessity from these, so I have at least control over obtaining and basking in these truths.  Any being that is like me would have my same capacity for knowledge, and though I find security in free will, someone else might not.

Any triumph or mistake or inaction is thus in their control to at least some extent, and the non-moral existential weight of this on its own is enough to paralyze a certain kind of person.  Indecision and the vastness or permanence of various choices could tempt a person to lock up.  The moral responsibility that comes with free will might just increase the personal terror.  While there are epistemological and psychological factors that might complicate a person's attitude towards striving for moral correctness, their actual beliefs and deeds would not be exempt from valid judgment.  They could not always control the circumstances they have found themselves in, but they could always have avoided an intellectual mistake or an immoral behavior.

There is always a core part of oneself that one is able to master and direct.  Rather than the other way around, only the illusion, for some people, of an inability to control their worldview and actions is present.  It is not that people only have at best the metaphysical or epistemological illusion of free will and they are really just pawns of deterministic factors.  No, it is within their power to sidestep every error and, as far as the evidence suggests, to leap into moral uprightness.  Since many people are not used to pursuing ultimate truths or doing anything more than what it takes to appease their meaningless, irrationalistic sense of persuasion, of course genuine autonomy could be quite frightening.

Free will is not something a person must assume or remain skeptical about.  As aforementioned, it follows from truths about both the laws of logic and the direct experience of consciousness, but certainly not in the sense that the seeming impression that I have volition is what proves its existence.  The ability to control some thoughts at a minimum and to control one's worldview in its entirety is there even if there are/were no moral obligations one should choose to follow.  Just as a hypothetical lack of volitional autonomy could be very disturbing to some, having that same volitional autonomy could be disturbing to others.  There is no one to blame, for better or for worse, for one's philosophical beliefs and the way one strives to live them out other than oneself.