N.B.: My "answer" is not really an answer to the question as asked. Forgive me. The following response can serve, however, to re-frame the question in a less complicated and easier to deal with way. As I will suggest, the middle ground in a controversy, as outlined by the OP's question, is sometimes the best place for disputants to resolve their seemingly irreconcilable viewpoints.
One of the reasons, I suggest, Christians and non-Christians alike get bogged down in protracted and often vociferous sessions of intense fellowship (as a pastor friend of mine called them) is because they are uncomfortable with paradox.
A statement that seems to contradict itself but may nonetheless be true: the paradox that standing is more tiring than walking.
A person, thing, or situation that exhibits inexplicable or contradictory aspects: "The silence of midnight, to speak truly,
though apparently a paradox, rung in my ears" (Mary Shelley).
A statement that is self-contradictory or logically untenable, though based on a valid deduction from acceptable premises.
The root cause of some of the serious schisms that have divided Christians over the centuries, I believe, is their discomfort with paradox. One method that Christians have used to deal with their discomfort with paradox is to come down hard on one truth to the virtual exclusion of the other corresponding truth. Of course, disputants on both sides of the schism are reluctant even to grant that the "other side" is true.
Where would Calvinism be, for example, without its U (as in T-U-L-I-P) in unconditional election, and where would Arminianism be without its corresponding C in conditional election (also referred to as category election)? The two sides' refusal to accept as truth the corresponding (dare I say opposite?) side of the paradox has divided Christians for centuries. Entire denominations have sprung up in response to and as evidence of a certain way of drawing a theological line in the sand.
Not that the formation of denominations over theological disagreements is necessarily a bad thing. Quite often, the opposing sides have agreed to disagree agreeably, as long as the other side hews to the essential tenets of the faith, as summarized, for example, in the Apostles' Creed. Keeping the main thing the main thing--namely, growing the church universal through the preaching of the kerygma--has served to benefit the holy catholic church, in spite of her theological differences, emphases, and nuances.
Regarding the subject of CDV, which zippy2006 has defined as the belief that "All of a person's volitional states are causally determined by prior causes in time," I suggest that human existence as it was designed by God is both deterministic and indeterministic--a classic case of not "either/or' but "both/and." Personally, I am quite comfortable believing that both perspectives have validity, given their proper premises. As to where to "draw the line" between the two perspectives, well, is there really a line to be drawn?
Just as God has endued our physical existence with characteristics that are beyond our control, as evidenced in the outworkings of our autonomic nervous system when it is functioning normally, so also has he endued us with a measure of freedom which we can all express within the parameters of his permissive will. Interestingly, we can also express our freedom within the parameters of his decretive will by obeying him. We choose to obey Him out of our love for him and for our neighbor. We can, however, choose not to obey him, thus cheating both Him and our neighbor of the obedient love they are due.
I am comfortable with paradox, and so was our Lord in his teaching. From the relatively easy-to-resolve paradox as found in Matthew 16, Mark 8, and Luke 9 (viz., by losing one's life for Jesus and his gospel we actually gain our lives), to the paradoxes that are virtually impossible to resolve fully, of which the determinism/indeterminism debate is but one, as Christians we sometimes need to appeal to Isaiah 55, where we read,
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.
“As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts."
In conclusion, who really knows the extent to which God's image-bearers' lives are determined or indetermined? Personally, I think they exhibit characteristics of both, and I am comfortable with that.