If you want to follow the above approach I think the best resource is the fantastic Philosophy Bites podcast (http://www.philosophybites.com/) where philosophers are interviewed. And if you're more of a printed matter type of person, they have books with the transcribed interviews, too (https://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Bites-David-Edmonds/dp/019...).
This, I think, is a great way to identify the areas of philosophy you're interested in to zoom in further.
Financial Times: World Weekly, The Money Show, Alphachat
BBC: The World This Week, Analysis, In Our Time, Infinite Monkey Cage, The Public Philosopher, A History of Ideas
Philosophy: The Partially Examined Life, Philosophy Bites, The Philosopher's Zone, The History of Philosophy Without any Gaps
Others:
The Carnegie Podcast
Radio Atlantic
Guardian Books
Guardian Science Weekly
We really don't.
The author of the article has written off hundreds of years of philosophical debate about determinist free will versus indeterminism and decided that his interpretation of free will, which falls firmly in the causal indeterminism camp, is the right way to think about things. Admittedly that's the nice one, because determinism is hard when it comes to things like ethics and morality, but we don't need to redefine 'free will' to have the discussion. Especially when it's a low redefinition[1].
The fact is whether or not we have free will is largely irrelevant. There's a really interesting Philosophy Bites podcast with Daniel Dennett about what's important in the free will question[2]. It's well worth a listen if you're interested in philosophical stuff.
[1] http://www.fallacyfiles.org/redefine.html
[2] http://traffic.libsyn.com/philosophybites/Daniel_Dennett_on_...
It really depends what you are interested in. You might check out the Philosophy Bites podcast: http://philosophybites.com/ (now a book too) which has good, short discussions of current issues, and might help you figure out which philosophical questions you are interested in.
If you really want to tackle continental philosophy and have a computer background, I suggest starting with Phil Agre's work, like here: http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/critical.html
I'm increasingly under the impression that philosophy is "about" whatever the individual philosopher or reader or writer wants it to be about, and that a lot of philosophers really like arguing about what philosophy is about. Granted, this comes mostly from sporadic reading in the field and from listening to Philosophy Bites, but the combination has still made me increasingly skeptical of explanations about what philosophy is about.
