If free will was not real

[The Grand Nudger]

No, let's take a heroin addict.  He forms intent, on his own, and seeks out heroin.  Does his addiction compel him, or is it a part of his nature, and thus his intent and its expression as behavior free will?  This is the hardest case, along with the intent of schizophrenics and other dyfunctionals.  Is crazy something that happens to you, or is it what you are?  Does medication that normalizes your behavior give you BACK free will, or prevent you from forming intent as a free agent?  These are the interesting questions-- not whether free will is real, but how we should define the self.  In the end, I'd say it's not the free will that will likely turn out to be illusion, but the sense of the self as a thing, and ALL that means-- love, responsibility, etc.

If there is no self, then what has free will? You haven't defined free will (as loose as your definition is) without explicit reference to the self. It's -your- ability to form intent. Something -you- do free of external obstruction or compulsion. Pull the rug out from under that and there's no reason to even discuss free will, as you define it. In what sense could self be illusory, but free will, even as you define it, be otherwise?

I don't think that med's give people back anything they lost...that's certainly not how the effect of those meds are described in any meaningful sense, more like ad copy and testimonials. Since I don't -assume- free will in asking that question... shrugs. A significant number of mood altering chemicals are inhibitors of some stripe. Inhibit the clockwork- alter the self, the will, the intent, the pursuant behavior which is expressed and forms all of our examples one way or another. Related to the above...that these chemicals work certainly -seems- to suggest that the self is a thing that other things act upon in predictable ways. It's as if our will can be manipulated with something as simple as alcohol. Our sense of self (and will) doesn't seem to be the sort of thing we could describe as illusory, even if we could describe either as being hilariously inaccurate. When you ask "does x give us back our free will" I'd say no. I'd say that x (or some inhibiting x, or a few too many drinks) affect our will.

It never went anywhere. What you describe as free will is merely a description of what will you experience when you don;t realize you're under the influence of y and z. Your SOP. Forest for the trees sort of thing.