It seems to me that Determinism is problematical to the extent that it rests on a questionable notion of causality. It assumes at at a writ large or cosmic level that "causes" and "effects" are concrete discreet entities. I do not see
causes and effects, I think
them as components of an explanatory model. I see an event or condition and ask what generated it. That is thinking of the thing to be explained as an "effect" and generated by a preexisting "cause". We even reverse the temporal sequence of the two. We actually see the "effect" first and look for the "cause" after, but our explanatory model necessarily treats the "cause" as antecedent to the "effect,"
Now DETERMINISM describes the universe as consisting of these reified constructs (cause and effect), whereas they are no more than the beginning- points and end-points of continua, like the beginning and end of a novel. The beginning is, more or less, necessary for the existence of the end, but it is not its cause. If this were so, every event is the product of all its (necessary and efficient) antecedent related events/conditions, and part of the "causal" environment of future events. But is this what is meant by determinism? I hope not: that would amount to pre-determinism whilch is blatantly absurd.