If free will was not real

[The Grand Nudger]

Let's say I've have a stroke, and now I have an overwhelming desire to fuck a goat, and an inability to move my right leg.  The goat desire comes from my brain, which has been damaged-- but not from any outside influence, but from a malfunction in my brain, which if there's a self you'd agree is it, I believe?

Regardless of whether or not our description of self is accurate - I'd say that this desire comes from the brain, sure.  That there is no "outside damage" is, I think...a stretch.  The various causes of strokes would be the "outside damage".   Should've skipped a few more deserts, stayed away from smokes, etc.  

Furthermore, the leg no longer responds to my will-- my intent to move it.  It just sits there.  But the fault, again, is in the brain-- the neuronal structures involved in moving the leg have been damaged.  My question now is this, is the damaged structure a part of the self which is dysfunctional, or is it actually itself a mechanism, called upon BY the self, but contained inside the head.

I don't know.  I don't think it is a part of the self.  It's a part of the same system...but in the example offered, where you still "have self" and just cant move your leg...I'd say that's probably not an issue of damage to the self, even if it is damage to an associated mechanism.  Doesn't appear to be damage to the will or intent either.   I know you hate the computer analogy...but, is a computer any more or less free before or after it's been damaged, or depending on the source of the damage as interior or exterior?  It just doesn't seem to be informative with regards to -that-.