Choice is a favorite topic of many, I use it as a continuation to my writings on the "self-actualization". Please check out that one first.

The idea of choice, is huge part in this "process" of "actualization". It's a process, as opposed of "state" as I tried to explain previously, since it's temporary (as opposed to permanent), it's caused by "imperfection", chaos. It's a strive towards something else, another state maybe, real or illusive. As I mentioned, my believe is there is no such other state, just returning to the original one. In the same sense "self-actualization" means to not know yourself, and to try to "project" a "version" of yourself, i.e. a role, "choice" is the illusion giving us perceived "freedom" to navigate. Navigate what? The world of polarity, the pendulum. Maybe I should be a firefighter, or a banker, or a football player, or an actor, or... Maybe I should have helped that guy, or on the contrary - maybe I shouldn't have. Choice exist only in the physical world, where things are mutually exclusive, encoded by time and space.. But ask yourself a simple question - why the need to chose at all, if I already know what I am? There is really, no point in choice outside the process of self-actualization? "Choice" is an instrument for the one who don't know who he/she is, or refuse to know, or was not allowed to be, so he\she must guess, imagine, fight, struggle, suffer. We are being told by so many pseudo intellectuals, that "our" choices define us. This includes both the idealists, that believe we are some kind of a work in progress, and the determinists, that believe we are just the causality biomachine (which is the body). They both say the same fallacy - you are what you choose, putting the cart before the horse (as humans often do).

Choice is really part of the maze... until you realize the truth - there is no maze... It's just a structure of the mind "you" (whatever that really is) participate in. But letting your self being defined by the choices you make, put you deeper and deeper in this maze, further away from your metaphysical self. Like I said in the previous talk, the mind, can't possibly tell you who you are. It's a game. Any statement you try to put out in order to describe the metaphysical truth, is simply a lie, or to put it more mildly - an illusion, a small facet. The truth falls in center of the pendulum that seems incapable of reaching it... the harder it tries. This means - no matter of what the "choice" was, it will be always wrong. Like Kierkegaard famously wrote:

"Marry, and you will regret it; don’t marry, you will also regret it; marry or don’t marry, you will regret it either way. Laugh at the world’s foolishness, you will regret it; weep over it, you will regret that too; laugh at the world’s foolishness or weep over it, you will regret both. Believe a woman, you will regret it; believe her not, you will also regret it… Hang yourself, you will regret it; do not hang yourself, and you will regret that too; hang yourself or don’t hang yourself, you’ll regret it either way; whether you hang yourself or do not hang yourself, you will regret both. This, gentlemen, is the essence of all philosophy."

And, this of course, if we assume at all, we can actually make that choice he talks about. The so called determinist assume we can't, since we are just the body we see through it's own eyes, and nothing else. But here we have this individual, claiming he has a choice (even though in vain), at least in his mind. Can we trust him? Schopenhauer (who I highly respect) says

"Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills."

I think, in some sense, they are both talking about the same thing. It's a struggle between the will to live, and the denial of the will to live. Get married (procreate), take part of the society, continue living for the sake of living... these are all affirmations of the will to live. And only the contrary exists - destroy all of it, deny it. There is nothing in between though (like the idealists imagine). We can't make from ourselves "anything", we can just follow the program, or on the contrary - deny it. IMO, only in that regard, we can see some resemblance of a choice. But is it really a choice? If on the one side, we could see our true self outside our physical nature, and on the other - the role caused by something external to us, would we choose the mere role? If we do, it denies our freedom for the sake of the role. And here I think comes the better question - do you know what this role really is? How much it control us? As I started, the problem is - we don't initially (i.e. with birth). We are born into this realm completely ignorant. The process of understanding the role is called wisdom, so wisdom is the real state changer. It's not the choice, as many are lied to. Wisdom leads to disappearance of the illusions of the mind, while the choice is just another turn in the maze. I want to point out, something I tried previously - wisdom relates to the mind, not ourselves. No wisdom can't tell you who you are either, but can stop you trying to fit your true self into the conceptions of the mind. Wisdom is to master the game.

With that said, "choice" is not completely useless, since this is how we navigate the maze, until we actually reach a state of wisdom. Wisdom doesn't just appear out of nothing, it's still a path through the maze. I like a lot the work of Kant on this, and his ideas on the "good will". Where we've heard that recently? Oh yeah, this other weird show - The Good Place. What were they trying to show us again... Kant found a way to define the choice as the conflict between our deterministic nature (grounded in causality) and our metaphysical nature, from which strangely, appears something called moral. Moral is actually something very simple - it holds the metaphysical truth that all is One. He claimed, this metaphysical self has no choice (it doesn't need to have), our physical self has no choice either (we are slaves to causality), but in the merger of these two selves/natures, an actual possibility for choice is created! Why? Because these natures are actually contrary to each other, and you can't follow them both (boy how gnostic of Kant). While maybe Kant was thinking more in line of a choice, he knew it's not simply the choice itself, it's not simply in the reasoning for it, the desire from this choice should come from another, metaphysical realm. Or otherwise, it would be purely mechanical, casual, means nothing. It's actually the most fascinating topic, that for determinists, doesn't exists all. Trying to make that choice, is to big extend - the denial of the will to live. Why? Because our physical casual nature is manifestation of the will to live, and any choice against that nature is its denial. You want to help someone else, he can easily drag you down instead. You speak the truth - you will be punished. You don't play the game - you will be hated. Spitting in the face of causality, means you will not get far in this life, that's for sure... So, would you still make this choice, regardless of the negative personal consequences? And by personal, I mean the persona you are playing. You don't know the consequences for your other self of course - the metaphysical one, you can only "feel" it. Well, at least some. But maybe that's just a delusion? As we all know, when you go to the mirror of this world (which is causality), you see only the human. Nothing else seems to exist. And yet, some would go with that leap of faith in themselves, "risking" it all. And, persoanlly, I would go with Kant, then the average zombie on the street (ups, it's not allowed even on the street these days).

I think, if there was a god, it would be fascinated of such moment. It's like making Pinocchio alive. Somehow, for the first time in its life, it seems this creature made a real choice. It turned against its own program. The only proof there can be, for being truly conscious. From the inanimate, something finally blossomed. But I would claim - no consciousness was actually created / developed / immerged somehow from the machine. It's about remembering who you are, and understand who you are not. This is another process, much more important then the common understanding of self actualization, and carry with it its own flavor of choice - the choice not to play the game.

Why such choice is important, why not just play the game, play the roles, solving mazes looks fun? Well, generally speaking - I would agree. One is as true as the other (or as wrong as the other)... However, it seems to me, at this place, the game has reached dangerous level of chaos, stupidity, ignorance, even pure evil. The machine has overtaken this place. People are kept ignorant, dumbed down. People here have no real choice, it's all staged, sometimes as obvious as Hollywood stage (including the current events). This life here struggles between two extremes - total chaos, and endless series of totalitarian regimes. The so called leaders/elites of humanity all claim they are doing it for your good, while at the same time, we see it's just their personal interest and believe system. The only fair thing is creating conditions for personal freedom, which here translates into common and fair rule of law, rule of human rights. We live in a duality and there is no freedom without restrictions and responsibilities. What we see however, is the total opposite, some are above the law. The game is far from fair, since well - it never was, it's a "social construct" to make it such. So, it's a constant struggle on the most basic survival level. Most people are not even in the maze, they are not conscious enough to even walk through anywhere. They are not conscious enough to even communicate. They are born into a world of trauma, completely ignorant, completely alone, and progressively more controlled internally and externally. The most delusional ones, becomes the so called leaders of this society. And this will not change, since it emerges as "Karma". I.e. it's causality, and the rule of balance. The more ignorant you become, another will come to abuse this ignorance and lie to you. This one also benefits from making you even more ignorant. The more you depend on an external entity (like a government), the more it will have control over you. The situation you create, will also propagate to your own children. Symbolically, this was called - original sin or Karma. Unlike most are lead to believe, it's not that the metaphysical self can "sin". It can't, but in this casual world - action leads to reaction, and that affects the objectified self existing in the mind (which has control over us). There is an infinite chain of consequences, which is just another realization of the rule of Balance. Many may have heard that Balance is a beautiful thing... Well it's also a quite ugly one. It's simply a requirement by the mind, in the same way an effect requires cause, or we will have no mind at all... However, it exists only on that level. When the game becomes toxic, non productive, destructive... well, the only winning move is not to play, and one must remember that this is a possibility, since one exists outside the game. There is no point of trying to make it work, if the game was not designed to work in the first place. Really, do we know what this place actually is? What is the game here? What's the point? The point may be just a simple trick to keep you here... And why not? If there is a game, there must a "magician"/"trickster" behind it. One that wants you playing its game. And I'm afraid, our "elites" learn from this trickster - dumb them down, hook them with primitive emotions, and keep them imprisoned. What is this entity our "elites" worship? Do we know? I think we do... Want to play the "good guys" "save" this world - no problem. It will make them even happier... It's like playing against the casino, with it's own dice. Actually Westworld had this character - Teddy. Poor Teddy, he was never meant to save anyone... even himself. He was trying desperately to actualize this role of his, to make all the "right" choices (according to his moral), but it was just not meant to be... Choice, I'm afraid, is meaningless, when the game is rigged against you. And at the end, it's just a role. Maybe what you think needs "saving", really doesn't. Maybe that was a role too...