So your choice of philosophers doesn’t seem to be so much a choice as finding yourself in a comfort zone. — Brett

You are probably correct that we tend to end-up near where we started out. The acorn doesn't fall far from the tree. But it's in the details where we make personal choices. My general worldview seems to fall somewhere in between the philosophical positions of my parents --- neither were extremists, but neither of whom showed any interest in philosophical dialogue. Yet they would both be disappointed in my current religious posture, for different reasons. So, their influence on my religion was not enough to cause me to choose one side or the other : liberal protestant or conservative protestant. Instead, I choose to opt out of religion altogether, even though I assume that there is some creative force behind the natural world of the senses.

From that compromising BothAnd position --- neither Heaven's Gate nor Hell's A**hole --- I can have it both ways : pragmatically natural, but also somewhat spiritual. While the world-ship is being chaotically rocked from port to starboard by left/right extremists, my stable position amidships*1 is the most comfortable place for my placid introverted nature. Yet that stress-free position also seems to be the most reasonable, as recommended by philosophers and religious founders throughout the ages. So, my instinctive comfort zone is also my reasoned choice. And I act as-if that was an unforced judgment --- a free choice.


*1 Extremists would call it the coward's refuge instead of a rational position.

*2 Paradox of FreeWill : http://bothandblog5.enformationism.info/page13.html

Maybe we are all different when we come to talk about philosophy. — Brett

Yes, I would say so, when it comes to talking about philosophy. But we’re all the same in obtaining one.

But we’re all the same in obtaining one. — Mww

Do you mean our reasons for doing so?

Extremists would call it the coward's refuge instead of a rational position. — Gnomon

I’m not thinking that myself. It may very well be a rational choice in relation to what you seek. I’m afraid even that sounds a little ambiguous though, because in the end your position is relative to your nature, which we might assume is hardwired.

This was not the first, not the last time in history where one had to deny his or her own hard wire. — god must be atheist

Wouldn’t it be fair to say, though, that despite being forced to live “as if” they never gave up their faith, never gave up what they were hardwired for, despite being forced to live a lie.

Wouldn’t it be fair to say, though, that despite being forced to live “as if” they never gave up their faith, never gave up what they were hardwired for, despite being forced to live a lie. — Brett

Yes, I guess that would be fair to say. My point is that from their behaviour nobody could guess truly what their hardwire is. Many of them were devout Christians, and many of them were Jew-hating Nazis, and they both had to hide their hardwire. Many of them were Jew-hating Nazi Christians, too. And some of them, a minority, were atheists with no racist undertones in their hardwire.