How does compatibilism attempt to reconcile free will with determinism?

Compatibilism is the philosophical thesis that free will—the capacity required for moral responsibility—is logically consistent with universal causal determinism. Compatibilists attempt to reconcile these concepts through several distinct approaches:1

• Conditional Analysis: Philosophers like G.E. Moore and A.J. Ayer argued that acting freely simply means one would have acted otherwise if one had chosen to do so. This suggests that freedom is compatible with determinism because the ability to do otherwise is defined conditionally rather than as an absolute power to break causal chains.2
• Redefining Freedom: Thomas Hobbes and David Hume argued that freedom is merely the liberty to act according to one's own desires or inclinations. If an action is caused by one's own choices, it is free, regardless of whether those choices were themselves determined.3
• Rejecting Alternate Possibilities: Harry Frankfurt argued that the ability to do otherwise is not necessary for moral responsibility. He proposed that freedom is instead a matter of identifying with one's own desires, distinguishing free agents from those who act on impulses they do not endorse.2
• Reactive Attitudes: P.F. Strawson grounded compatibilism in human psychology, suggesting that moral responsibility is defined by our natural "reactive attitudes" (such as gratitude or resentment) toward others, making the truth of determinism irrelevant to our social practices.2