1) There is free will, and I decide to believe in it.
2) There is free will, but I decide not to believe in it.
3) There is no free will, but I "decide" to believe in it.
4) There is no free will, and I "decide" not to believe in it.
I believe in free will, so it is either option 1 or 3 for me. Option 1 is great, because I will be right if that is the case. But, suppose there is no free will? It seems preposterous to encourage belief in something that does not exits, right? But, what if you can maximize well-being by doing so?
Back when I was an atheist, I decided that it didn't matter whether or not free will actually existed. It just seemed apparent to me that society was better off if people as a whole believed that free will existed. I tend to think that my personal well-being curve is maximized by believing it does exist. And, I thought, the overall well-being landscape of society (the aggregate of all indivdidual well-being curves) would also be maximized by such a belief.
Granted, I only got through a few paragraph's of the guys blog post while waiting in line to vote. He may yet change my mind by the time I reach the end.