A choice can perhaps be a decision that contains an absence of an impulse or instinctual drive that mechanically pulls us to act without reason in order to immediately satisfy and it needn't only be sexual or aggressive. It is acting without reason; the autonomy to reason is acting without being enslaved to our impulses. A choice must therefore be wholly moral, something peculiar only to those who possess it. "Every determination of choice proceeds from the representation of a possible action to the deed through the feeling of pleasure or displeasure, taking an interest in the action or its effect.”

Here's how I experience choice. I'm not sure what the philosophical or psychological implications are.

I picture a spring, water bubbling up from underground into a small pool. Source unknown or at least unseen. The water is impulse, motivation, desire - all have the potential to lead directly to action. Choice is the decision whether or not to act on the impulse.

Isn't our choice to act or not to act on our desire based on a stronger desire?

"Every determination of choice proceeds from the representation of a possible action to the deed through the feeling of pleasure or displeasure, taking an interest in the action or its effect.” — TimeLine

I am not not sure if I understand this. Does it exclude instinct? Are cats and dogs capable of choices? If it's based on pleasure and displeasure why is it important if it's represented or immediate? The source of the action seems to be the same.

Choice is an action in a specific direction. Perception can be viewed as potential (virtual) action.

Over time we do develop preferences (habits) in memory which are one of the factors affecting choices we take.

Isn't our choice to act or not to act on our desire based on a stronger desire? — mew

My first reaction is "no," but I'm not sure about that. What difference does it make if it is?

Preferences or strong desires (e.g. addictions) influence but do not dictate choices, as do innumerable other influences. Habits (memory) are influencers but they are not what chooses.

Preferences or strong desires (e.g. addictions) influence but do not dictate choices, as do innumerable other influences. Habits (memory) are influencers but they are not what chooses. — Rich

I didn't say that preferences or strong desires dictate choices. I made a specific distinction between desires and other factors which motivate action and the act of choice. I sort of said the opposite of what you seem to be saying I said.

Yes, we are in agreement. I am responding to your statement that you aren't sure, so I was providing some additional information. Sorry for any misinterpretation.

Yes, we are in agreement. I am responding to your statement that you aren't sure, so I was providing some additional information. Sorry for any misinterpretation. — Rich

Thanks. I'd like to hear what Mew has to say too.

I am not not sure if I understand this. Does it exclude instinct? Are cats and dogs capable of choices? If it's based on pleasure and displeasure why is it important if it's represented or immediate? The source of the action seems to be the same. — mew

A 'choice' must be rational, thus cats and dogs are not capable of choice but are purely instinctual. The decision to act with reason irrelevant to the pleasure or displeasure that it will produce and that therein contains no instinctual influence can be considered an actual choice. Choice must always reflect what is moral.

A 'choice' must be rational, thus cats and dogs are not capable of choice but are purely instinctual. The decision to act with reason irrelevant to the pleasure or displeasure that it will produce and that therein contains no instinctual influence can be considered an actual choice. Choice must always reflect what is moral. — TimeLine

Choices don't have to be rational. As a matter of fact, I think they generally aren't. My wife asks me - "would you like pizza or shrimp for dinner?" I picture a pizza, smell it in my mind, nothing. I picture some shrimp. Scampi, pasta - my mouth starts to water. "Let's have shrimp." Nothing rational took place, but I chose. One thing I have learned is that for about 90% of choices, it doesn't matter what you choose. Someone just has to make a decision and take responsibility. You can almost flip a coin.

"Choice" is the term used to describe the product our minds generate when presented with multiple options, given the circumstances surrounding the scenario in which the choice is made.

Hi! What counts as a choice? Are our preferences chosen by us? If they are, based on what do we choose our preferences? If they are not, are the things we choose -based on our preferences- chosen? — mew

To me it seems obvious that people have "difficulty'' answering your question - I'm no exception.

What I'd like to say is that there's a certain impossibility that bears upon the question - it is impossible to discover the extent of the influence both external and internal factors have on what is the act of choosing. The problem of free will has no easy solution. We may speculate though. I'm open to that but then it's just my word against someone elses.

To me it seems obvious that people have "difficulty'' answering your question - I'm no exception.

What I'd like to say is that there's a certain impossibility that bears upon the question - it is impossible to discover the extent of the influence both external and internal factors have on what is the act of choosing. The problem of free will has no easy solution. We may speculate though. I'm open to that but then it's just my word against someone elses. — TheMadFool

I don't think we have any difficulty answering Mew's question, we just have difficulty agreeing.

And then you brought free will into it. If you and TimeLine were listening to my wife and me talking about pizza vs. shrimp, I think you would agree that a choice had been made. That doesn't say anything about "free will." If I can't choose without free will, if something else is doing the choosing, then I can't do anything. Is something else doing the running, talking, burping I thought I was doing?

I don't think we have any difficulty answering Mew's question, we just have difficulty agreeing. — T Clark

There's no correct answer to Mew's queries. In other words it's just a matter of opinion and speculation. Isn't that why there's ''difficulty agreeing''?

And then you brought free will into it. — T Clark

Isn't that what the OP had in mind? Where else does choice have relevance?

Isn't that what the OP had in mind? Where else does choice have relevance? — TheMadFool

And my point, whether or not you agree with it, is that free will is not needed in order to choose.

There's no correct answer to Mew's queries. In other words it's just a matter of opinion and speculation. Isn't that why there's ''difficulty agreeing''? — TheMadFool

Actually, to be quite honest, there are only really two motivations for believing in libertarian free will in terms of how we choose things- 1) it satisfies the unreflective intuitions we have about moral responsibility, and 2) we feel we have it.

Go with the compatibilist definition: a choice is something that you make generally un-coerced by external forces.

What constitutes generally un-coerced by external forces is for the judge and jury to decide in a given case.

For example, if a person has a tumor on a particular part of their brain which causes them to suddenly behave abnormally, we wouldn't exactly hold that behavior against them after we remove the tumor. (other "mitigating" factors could be addiction, extortion, a moment of passion, fear, coercion by another, etc...).

When we find no mitigating factors we're forced to hold people pragmatically responsible for their "choices" as a necessary means of correction.

Choice is a function of our will. Will is a type of choice. We make choices – but why do make choices? We are motivated, but what drives the motivation? Desire drives motivation – so what is desire? Desire is an appetite – a hunger – a predilection. An appetite can be visceral or cerebral or both. Appetites come in all shapes and sizes and various levels of intensity. Appetites as a metaphor live in our stomachs; however we also have appetites in our intellect – mind’s eye – emotions – genitals – wardrobes - etc. We sniff at something before we are ready to taste it. The sniff is the priming of the pump for our choice. Our choice is our hearts desire. We are free to will a choice, but our choices are largely determined and somewhat finite. Infinite is an abstraction we dance with, but really do not know. Our nose leads us towards a predilection, but we don’t develop an appetite until we taste. Our nose sparks our desire – that’s why pheromones are so important. We usually choose between a limited set of options. So there is freedom – but only to a degree. We have a constrained freedom amongst limited choices. Kind of like words and ideas.

Nothing rational took place because it was instinctual. Your decision was propelled by an impulse but a rational choice to eat foods that contains the highest nutrients for optimal health and the required energy to sustain you despite the taste is an actual choice.

A choice can perhaps be a decision that contains an absence of an impulse or instinctual drive that mechanically pulls us to act without reason in order to immediately satisfy and it needn't only be sexual or aggressive. It is acting without reason; the autonomy to reason is acting without being enslaved to our impulses. A choice must therefore be wholly moral, something peculiar only to those who possess it. "Every determination of choice proceeds from the representation of a possible action to the deed through the feeling of pleasure or displeasure, taking an interest in the action or its effect.” — TimeLine

Nothing rational took place because it was instinctual. Your decision was propelled by an impulse but a rational choice to eat foods that contains the highest nutrients for optimal health and the required energy to sustain you despite the taste is an actual choice. — TimeLine

I hear you talk, but I do not hear you saying very much - you seem very adept at hiding behind your words - obfuscation. Are you saying we choose without reason or our choices are moral? Try and be clear - stop trying to impress us with your words - impress us with a clear reason.

A choice is a desire. A desire is a wish to obtain something. For example, I wish to talk – to express a thought. The thought that I express – like this one – is my choice. It is very pertinent to ask why I wish to talk – that goes to motivation. My motivation is to understand myself and the idea of choice. Choice is related to free will. So, then we explore the nature of free will and its boundaries. Our free will is limited by the available choices we can make – there is always a limit. So we have free will, but it is limited.

I hear you talk, but I do not hear you saying very much - you seem very adept at hiding behind your words - obfuscation. Are you saying we choose without reason or our choices are moral? Try and be clear - stop trying to impress us with your words - impress us with a clear reason. — woodart

First of all, I am writing so you can't hear me talk. Secondly, I am not hiding my words, you just fail to understand. And who is 'us'?

In writing on this forum we are talking (writing) and listening (reading) to one another which is - 'us'.

Are you saying we choose without reason or our choices are moral? — woodart

Please answer the question and stop quibbling.

↪T Clark Nothing rational took place because it was instinctual. Your decision was propelled by an impulse but a rational choice to eat foods that contains the highest nutrients for optimal health and the required energy to sustain you despite the taste is an actual choice. — TimeLine

Please clarify. Are you saying my decision to eat shrimp rather than pizza is not a choice? That only "rational choices" are really choices? How many of the situations in our lives where we have to pick between two or more options are what you call "actual choices?"

What percentage of the actions you take in life do you think are rational?

And my selection of shrimp is not instinctual, which generally refers to behavior that is innate and fixed. There's a good chance that when the situation comes up again, I'll pick pizza.

I hear you talk, but I do not hear you saying very much - you seem very adept at hiding behind your words - obfuscation. Are you saying we choose without reason or our choices are moral? Try and be clear - stop trying to impress us with your words - impress us with a clear reason. — woodart

Rude. Unnecessary. Insulting. I don't really agree with TimeLine about the subject we're discussing, but she definitely is not quibbling, obfuscating, or hiding. This webpage is intended for civil discussion. Please behave like a grownup.

Hi! What counts as a choice? Are our preferences chosen by us? If they are, based on what do we choose our preferences? If they are not, are the things we choose -based on our preferences- chosen?

Isn't choice primarily about the future (repetition is about the past), what we anticipate will happen when we act in a certain manner. We negate the present transforming it into the future as it were a completed action (as past). The force of that negation is the willing ego.

Isn't choice primarily about the future (repetition is about the past), what we anticipate will happen when we act in a certain manner. We negate the present transforming it into the future as it were a completed action (as past). The force of that negation is the willing ego. — Cavacava

Yes. Very Bergsonian.

Please clarify. Are you saying my decision to eat shrimp rather than pizza is not a choice? That only "rational choices" are really choices? How many of the situations in our lives where we have to pick between two or more options are what you call "actual choices?" — T Clark

Not necessarily. You are hungry, but why? Physically, you are in need of sustenance to enable the energy to function adequately. You are a human being and as such require a number of daily nutrients to ensure optimal health and therefore what you ingest should rationally point you into the direction of foods that would enable this, but your 'mouth watered' at the idea of eating shrimp pizza, what will provide you with the pleasurable stimuli that therein also contains minimal nutrients and probably an overload of unnecessary energy. It makes no sense and your impulse to eat it was due to this immediate and albeit fleeting pleasure.

But like how we have the first-order processes of mind, where there are rules that govern cognitive resources in a way the renders the conditions necessary for sensory experience, hunger as an impulse is required; taste, on the other hand, is an experience. Therefore, attempting to ascertain the conditions that enable this perception of 'shrimp' to manifest itself in your mind and that governs your decisions is necessary. Perhaps - at elementary level - comparatively think about a man who lives in abject poverty; he would not salivate over shrimp because he never ate it; empiricism would agree, but Kant probably wouldn't.

What percentage of the actions you take in life do you think are rational? — T Clark

In reality, not much, such is being human. But, I do what I can and philosophy helps.