None of us would argue that “we” were responsible for the structure of our skeletal system. “We” are not pumping blood around our body and “we” are not digesting the food in our system.
Similarly, as “we” are not responsible for the chemical composition of our blood and for the neural states of our brain, “we” cannot be held responsible for the nature of our thoughts and emotions.
Consider a huge thunderstorm bearing down on a city. Our neural networks are analogous to that storm. There is no entity inside the storm pattern that is guiding the storm, and yet it obeys rather complex laws that produce quite unpredictable behaviour. There is an analogy here to human behaviour.
If “I” decide to kill someone and I am sentenced to life imprisonment, the jury that sentences me has no more free will than “I” do.
The argument against free will is not an argument for immorality. “We”must still move to wards states of being, both individual and collective, that are oriented to empathy and compassion, simply because these states make complete, ultimate sense.