[jamesrcole]

I don't think there is actual free will, and I think the appearances of it is just how our minds present things to us -- that is, I basically agree with the description you give.

But I object to statements like:

> the free will is there but only as a convenient abstraction.

Here's an analogy to illustrate my objection. It's inaccurate to say that the person Santa Claus literally exists but only as a mental concept.

The accurate way to put it is that the Santa Claus person doesn't literally exist but we have mental concepts describing such a person.

Free will doesn't exist but we have a mental concept of such a thing.

That's the honest way to put it.

[alexmat]

I think that's a fair point. I usually phrase it that way to avoid coming off too strong to people whose beliefs are unknown to me.

So to sum up, we agree that the concept of free will exists and is experienced, but it is just a mechanism that the brain uses to navigate and make decisions about a dynamic environment and not free will in the classical sense of having control over the decisions we make.

Honestly, after writing that out, I agree even more strongly with you! I think we should relegate the term "free will" to the classic definition and adopt Metzinger's vocabulary for the new metaphysical concepts. Then it's very simple, there is no free will, but there is a Phenomenal Self Model that the brain relies on which can be conflated with classical free will.

I will endeavor to be more clear in the future. Thanks!