There are three basic forms of power in society: overt coercion, remuneration, and persuasion. Overt coercion, when our goals and interests are clear to ourselves and we are forced to other ends, is the most obvious affront to free will. Remuneration changes our behavior by offering us something we want more. Persuasion is the most opaque form of power, because we are convinced that we are acting freely but actually are pursuing others' ends. It is only the unconscious manipulation of persuasion that undermines our sense of free will. The gun or the pile of cash may force us to act against our desires, but we still know what they are. Freedom from persuasion requires becoming aware of our own minds, and strengthening the mental faculties that contribute to the useful illusion of free will. The question posed by this commentary is whether people in general can be coerced toward this subjective freedom by force, cash, or persuasion. Society is more interested in encouraging conformity than self-awareness, but when we encourage one another to become more self-aware and self-governed, we support one another toward freedom from automaticity. Raising a child is an exercise of coercion that inevitably involves encouraging conformity and automaticity, as well as mature self-awareness and decisionmaking. Distinguishing the social pressures that encourage self-awareness from those that discourage it will become even more important in the era of moral enhancement. Raki ć and I agree that voluntary moral enhancement is desirable, and that involuntary moral enhancement contributes to the subjective freedom of mentally ill adults. However, in arguing that moral enhancement must be voluntary for everyone else, Raki ć is attempting to defend a reifi ed conception of free will that, in my view, is at odds with both material and political reality. Raki ć even concedes that his threshold conception of free will is an illusion, but insists that it is a necessary illusion, and one so fragile that it evaporates whenever externally encouraged. Although I agree that he is correct that we appear to be enabled by the myth of free will, we are enabled by degrees, and not across a binary threshold. Nor are any of us ever free of the pressures to be more subjectively automatic or free; we are always surrounded by guns, money, and opinions. Raki ć points to the research of Davide Rigoni et al., 1 Kathleen Vohs and Jonathan Schooler, 2 and Roy Baumeister et al., 3 which suggests that belief in free will enables self-control and moral behavior. But these free will researchers were precisely not looking for a binary, threshold effect. Both the Rigoni et al. and the Vohs and Schooler