system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Why Isn't "Free Will" a Pseudo Problem?

On Tuesday, let's say, I ask myself, "I wonder if I have free will?"  I sit down with a cup of coffee and start reading philosophy journal articles and scientific papers in hopes of finding an answer.

But whether I'm *actually* free or not is *independent* of the conclusion I reach.

Suppose the universe is completely determined, each state of the universe following as a necessary consequence of each preceding state.  Then each brain state I have follows as a necessary consequence of each preceding state.  And since my thoughts are nothing but brain states, then it was already determined, long ago, that I will reach one conclusion or another when I sat down on Tuesday to contemplate my free will.  I might conclude "I am free to do whatever I want tomorrow."  But if I think that means I'm going to do anything different than what I was always necessarily going to do tomorrow, that belief is false, in a completely deterministic universe, though I couldn't have avoided that belief.

Maybe I conclude that "I" do orchestrate some *unique* chain of causality that is at least in *some* sense independent of the preceding states of the universe.  Great.  I go about my business.  (And, again, even if I'm wrong (about being free), I couldn't have concluded otherwise.)

Suppose I am *not* *in* *fact* determined, but I *conclude* that I am?  What does the conclusion that I am determined mean for me, practically?  Nothing.  It doesn't lead to any practical change in my behavior.  It means that the sensations, urges and desires that guide my decisions necessarily had to happen.  But what does that mean for what do I do next?  Nothing at all.  My (necessary) urges will determine that.  The conclusion will not cause me to *stop* wanting to do whatever I want to do.  It will always have been the case, I am assuming, that I will want to do what I want to do next.

I know compatibilists re-define "freedom" along the following lines: "People are 'free' if they had a sensation of wanting to do something before they did it, even though it was impossible for them *not* to do what they did," but that also yields no practical consequence.

Again, we are either free or not independently of our conclusion on the question, so any deliberation on the matter is ultimately pointless for practical purposes.
gpt
While being neutral on the general account here, many Philosophical problems are 'ultimately pointless for practical purposes' (Depending on how you take the phrase) but Philosophers don't think this is particularly significant.