I assumed you were assuming a "homunculus" definition of free will. (which is reasonable since you give three different philosophical positions on it yet didn't

I assumed you were assuming a "homunculus" definition of free will. (which is reasonable since you give three different philosophical positions on it yet didn't indicate which you subscribed to) "Actually based on your previous sentence you seem to believe that -- not me." If you really aren't an individual it's not that hard to extend... You are a collection of finite state machines... Same conclusions apply. However as far as people are concerned you might as well assume a "homunculus" theory since the transitions they care about happen inside a first person narrative (for the most part). Kind of like how classical mechanics isn't exactly precisely true, but still best at explaining macroscopic behavior. "Look into studies done on patients with severed brain hemispheres. It shows you that there is more than one competing selves." It shows you that each half of a brain is capable of qualifying as "human". It does not show you there are two competing selves in humans whose hemispheres are connected. Kind of like sometimes one twin absorbs the other in the womb. I bet if you take a random grown adult, partially lobotomize them, entirely remove half their brain, if they're not completely disabled they'll be more on par with dog than human level intelligence.