Let me ask a question that I think brings together a lot of the issues in the previous thread:
Suppose many of us agree (roughly) with these three claims about the U.S. as well as other nations (which I think are consistent with Bruce Waller's points): (1) the criminal justice system punishes people in ways that are overly retributive (not to mention ineffectual for rehabilitation), (2) there is an unjust distribution of benefits and wealth that undermines equal opportunity, and (3) some of 1 and 2 derive from an overblown sense of free will--e.g., of people's ability to overcome internal and external constraints or limitations.
Practical question: Are we more likely to improve the situation by (1) telling people that free will is an illusion, (2) telling people that free will has limitations and comes in degrees, or (3) neither.
I mention this point at the end of my review of Sam Harris' book, because he clearly think (1), while I'm more inclined to think (2), though the most likely answer may be (3). Obviously, much depends on how you tell them what you tell them (and on what exactly people already believe), but I'd like to hear what people think. I will fill in my reasons along the way.