Hume says that if an action is not caused, then it is just a random, chance action - not a free action. But James says that if an action is caused, then it had to happen and nothing else could have happened. Thus a free act must involve choosing between genuine future possibilities, which requires that the free act was not caused. Which view of a free act is preferable, the soft determinist's view of a free yet caused action, or the libertarian view of a free and uncaused action? Justify your choice.