There's an important factor usually missing from "free will" discussions: that a deterministic consciousness engine must include the individual's beliefs about free will. Someone who believes they have free will behave differently than someone who doesn't. Moreover, a society that believes in free will exert different behavioral pressures than one who doesn't.
While I don't think "free will" exists objectively (every choice is traceable to causes under any model), it seems to me to be a necessary illusion for people to accept responsibility over their own behavior, internally and externally. However, it is at best a fuzzy abstraction, and there is absolutely benefit to continue exploring and unpacking the free will story.
I agree with you that it may be beneficial to maintain the illusion of free will in the society, however the truth that emerges from science and philosophical discussions must be called out and their consequences must be carefully analyzed (no matter how bitter they may be). It's like the good old debate between good v/s truth where two may not be compatible.
While I don't think "free will" exists objectively (every choice is traceable to causes under any model), it seems to me to be a necessary illusion for people to accept responsibility over their own behavior, internally and externally. However, it is at best a fuzzy abstraction, and there is absolutely benefit to continue exploring and unpacking the free will story.