Choice

Surely you didn’t “Ask” to be born what you are, to understand and communicate using English, to be male or female, to be a child or adult, to be anything at all. And so, if you did not choose to be exactly where and when you are, right now, right where “You” are, then why do you believe in Choices at all? At what point during a human’s lifetime, or the lifetime of any animal, does it begin to make a so-called “Choice”? And what is a Choice? Is choice nothing but an illusion? A false feeling and sense of control, over forces that you also believe influence life, and anything else? Many humans convince themselves that they are “in control” and “make choices” but do they? Is there any moment during this (false) sense of security that an actual “Choice” is made, and what is it? A decision, an action, an execution, perhaps. You inteded to do something, and you did it, and therefore, that was your “Choice” all along. You intend to do something. And you do it. And the discrepancy between the two must be your, “Choice”, correct?

Let’s get to the bottom of the matter.

It maybe true that a human can never know for certain, with confidence, or with the backing of science, that a “Choice” is an illusion or real. But that shouldn’t matter. What should matter, and what does matter, and how choices are measured, are between the difference of what any person can intend versus the actions that s/he either does or does not. So Choice has three parts: 1) the Intention, 2) the Action, and 3) the Inaction. It is from these three components that all “Choices” are made.

Looking back, it seems that if ‘Choice’ is an illusion, then it necessarily must be because its corresponding ‘Intention’ was/is also an illusion.

So it’s pointless to ask whether choices are illusions. It is only necessary to ask whether ‘Intentions’ are illusions. So…are they?

Choice is obviously real. The only relevant question is its nature.

It appears that, if everything is necessary, that there can be no choice. But choice is not the opposite of necessity, or at any rate, the opposite of this particular concept of necessity. This is a mere confusion of different concepts brought on by terminological overlap (i.e. one and the same word used for different concepts.)

You, however, appear to think that if we have no control over certain aspects of our lives (e.g. when, where and in what kind of body we are born) that we cannot have control over anything.

Absolutistic, binary, either/or, black-and-white, way of thinking. Not a good thing.

You can say that to choose means to force your way. You have a motive, a desire, an intention, a drive, an impulse, an inclination, some movement that comes from the bottom of your being. Now, if you stay loyal to it, instead of being distracted by something else, then one can say this is a consequence of choice.

Now, what we want to understand is the difference between loyalty (choice) and distraction (necessity.)

Are they not both attached to an impulse that comes from within?

We can say yes, they are, but loyalty (choice) is attached to a fundamental, deep-rooted, impulse whereas distraction (necessity) is attached to a superficial, shallow-rooted, impulse.

There is another way to explain the distinction.

Distraction does not eliminate the other impulse. It merely introduces another impulse on top of it, thereby repressing it. It changes its form. The impulse remains, hidden beneath the surface, interfering with the impulse of distraction, creating confusion, doubt, dissonance, insecurity, dishonesty, etc.

Loyalty, on the other hand, eliminates the other impulse, thus creating clarity, stability, confidence, security, honesty, etc.

Incorrect, the OP is intended to invoke and invite somebody to tell me, and to objectively demonstrate, the “starting point” of any particular or given ‘Choice’. Can you choose which brand of cereal to eat in the morning? Can you choose to add berries to your oatmeal, or not? What is the nature of this choice, or any choice? What are the degrees? Certainly, people say that they never “choose” to be born. But at what point in a lifetime is life ever a choice, if ever at all?

You are not on my level, Magnus. But I invite you up a few steps, at least. Begin to question, and answer. Really think about the nature of choice.

You are onto something, the right track, when you mentioned the “necessity of being”. You mentioned that a ‘choice’ can come “from deep within”, as if it were the essence of the spirit and soul. And this is true. But choices are influenced by almost infinite factors, especially including other people. People force each other to do things, to “make choices” that they don’t necessarily want to do. Therefore, spiritually, people are distinctly at odds with each other’s choices (and values).

Don’t give me an amateur response. Give me something good.

If choices do truly come “from deep within” (being-soul-spirit) as you mention, Magnus, then “choices” reveal everything critical and unique to any person or animal. Choices reveal the ‘Character’ of the thing. Choices reveal the nature of a thing.

Options.

We could be movie characters, witnessing thoughts in our heads, communicate amongst themselves. Schizophrenia type 1.

We could be divine agents, shaping our own destiny through the power of our will, agents of choice and choosing.

I lean towards Schizophrenia type three, a mix of schizophrenia type one and two, being the reasonable conclusion. But I really have no idea which is correct.

This would only be true if we really had the power and free will was not an illusion