Free will and/or self

I keep returning to free will because I see it as a sort of back-door approach to consciousness and self, and much more accessible. That is, "self" is such a woolly concept--it's a metaphor for...what? Mind? (Which is a metaphor for...self?)

Whereas free will, that's something on which most of us can agree is a real issue. For instance, if we don't have conscious free will, where does that leave our justice system? ("Sure I shot him, but I didn't have a choice!")

Put it this way: someone proves beyond all doubt that you don't actually have a 'self'--it's an illusion, you're deluded, and now you (!) see the light. And say, "So what? I still hurt when I read about the Middle East. I still feel pain when I cut myself. I still feel good when I laugh." Nothing changes.

Now imagine someone proves to you that you're an automaton without conscious freedom of action: you have no free will. How does that feel? For me, this is something I can actually imagine (I was going to say 'grok'--do young people know that term?).

This is a very personal issue--I had a profound awareness many years ago that when I spoke, in response to a question, an internal tape recorder created my answer, unbidden by "me"--the words just came out, automatically. That incident (June 12, 1974) changed my life.

So while I think self and free will are two sides of the same coin, free will is more accessible, the issue that most of us can at least talk about and have some idea of what we mean.