Intuition and will

Regarding the method that claims there is no free will:
If I continue to adhere to this method, even the intuition that we see what we see is nothing more than an illusion, for although studies can investigate the eye and its activity, it cannot be proven that what the eye does reflects to consciousness. And even if we perform actions with our bodies (such as raising a hand) that present ‘proof’ of what we see, this does not prove that what we see is not an illusion.
The illusion may digest (unconsciously) what is happening and express it in what is called “seeing.” And create an illusion that we see with our eyes. (Sounds like a conspiracy, it should be noted)
And yet, intuitively, everything leads to the fact that the eye reflects our consciousness. (Because how can we prove otherwise? And what would we derive from proving otherwise.)
By the way, even testing the evidence (by observation, which is only included in the evidence) would be contradictory if it seems that our evidence does not reflect the truth. (How can we conclude that what we saw in observation is nothing but an illusion? And if we assume that it is not an illusion, perhaps the result is itself an illusion?)
Even if such a test relies on hearing, perhaps our hearing is also deceiving us?
And in fact, it is not guaranteed that even the tools we created to test the evidence were not themselves subject to a mirage. (The result is apostate in its circumstances)
And maybe this is actually what is happening with the question of free will?
Only, on the question of free will, there is even more tension due to the principle of causality.
(By the way, I’ve read before that prediction doesn’t contradict free will.)
Of course, all of this assumes that choice is similar to evidence in terms of its intuitive status.
Is that roughly what some of your comments about free will mean?
And don’t you think prediction goes against free will?
thanks