... my point is that you are AWARE of counterfactuals and you CHOSE this one (whatever else might be the case surrounding this decision). — schopenhauer1

Since my being "AWARE" is post hoc confabulation, I "CHOSE" before I became "AWARE" (as Libet's experiments¹, etc show) that I have "CHOSEN" (e.g. from prior "counterfactual" – imagined – options), therefore any "decision" is (mostly) unconscious² as I point out here without raising the concept of "determinism" (which is your strawman, schop1, not mine).

.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6024487/ [1]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_effect_(psychology) [2]

Just more red herring. Do you like to cook it on garlic or lemon butter? As I said:

The deliberation may be "weighted" one way or the other due to various factors, but to us we are making decisions and following goals that we construct. That's how the phenomenology seems. You decided to go to the market, go for a jog, post on a philosophy forum, read up on the newest existentialist author, or any number of things. To YOU, YOU could have done OTHER. It's not a debate on what causes your decisions, it's the difference of phenomenology between humans and other animals. — schopenhauer1

Do you like to cook it on garlic or lemon butter? — schopenhauer1

These two ingredients are not mutually exclusive at all.

These two ingredients are not mutually exclusive at all. — Lionino

True, I did think that too.