Quote Originally Posted by Abra View Post
That is what we see as "free" will, although it's not necessarily what free will is defined as. If you ask me, I believe the definition is what needs to be altered, as that seems to be the part that's contradictory.
This is essentially the argument of "responsible determinists", which assert that free will, as in "people can do what they want to do", exists, and so they should be held responsible for their actions.

I think this is a bit silly, though, because you can't hold a machine responsible for doing what it has been programmed to do simply because the machine thinks it has chosen to do so by itself.

The best way to put it, I think, is that 'the illusion of free will exists'. This does mean that no one can be held responsible for their actions, but I'm not sure you want to get into that discussion (I don't think it matters).