quote:
Ok sure the brain fills in the gap, but this is more than just the brain filling in blind spots in our vision. But my experience shows me that I have free will. Just like I experience myself touching things, it is hot, or cold. My experience shows me one thing, and you are saying it isn't really that way.

That is the nature of an illusion.

quote:
It doesn't give us the illusion that we see something when we really don't see something.

That is precisely what it does. It fills in the information based on the surrounding context.

quote:
My main problem with your argument, is that you are taking a few exceptions to freedom and applying it to the whole. I say we have free will but not every action is free. You are taking a few empirically verified uncontrolled actions and applying it to every action. That is a logically fallacy.

At worst it is an extrapolation based on verifiable and repeatable evidence.

quote:
Another smaller problem, but it is still there. If no-one has free will how can we hold anyone responsible for their actions? If someone goes on a shooting rampage and kills 10 people, we don't say he had no control over his actions so we shouldn't punish him. No we probably put him in the chair, unless we figure out he is mentally unstable.

Without free will there is no justification for punishment, because we are all just reactionary animals who act out of our instincts. There is no need for criminal law, because really no-one commits crime, because they aren't free to do it.

Right, because the basis of our justice system relies upon the presupposition of free will. That doesn't mean its true. Criminals who intend to harm others should still be kept away from the public, but our justice system would certainly change. The notion of retributive justice becomes absurd. They still commit the crime, but the notion that they "could have done differently" goes out the window.