The subject of choosing has been a common denominator in many discussions. Based upon both, the recent and the past threads which I have had the privelege to be involved in and/or read, I suspect that the topic could be intriguing. The notion of choosing has far reaching consequences which touch upon many other concepts and subjects. It is not a goal to delve deeply into these other areas. The goal is to develop and maintain a focus upon the concept of choosing alone. I hope that much can be gained regarding an overall understanding if the concept of choosing is broken down and analyzed with a more directed focus upon exactly what elements constitute it's existence.

In order to avoid some recent communication problems that I have not only been involved in, but also found myself contributing towards their further negative development, I would like to have an upfront agreement between all participants to keep the discussion on an impersonal level at all costs. I feel that this agreement will go a long way in developing a more positive outcome on all levels, regardless of one's prior biases and/or philosophical disposition(s). I would also like to further suggest that the participants conduct a comprehension check, of sorts, regularly enough so that we all may develop and maintain that mode of shared understanding.

All in favor say "Aye"...



Then, let us focus on exactly what constitutes choosing?

I am going to read through others' suggestions and proposals to attempt to gain an understanding from different perspectives before deciding how I should approach the topic.

Everyone needs to accept that their "opinions" may be (probably are ) wrong.



I have

an opinion is an opinion everyone needs to understand that word first before giving their to someone... also respect others opinions as well...

Mirror...

How are you, my friend?



So what do you think about the concept of choosing?

What does it take to exist?

Oh yeah, is that an "Aye"?

Opinions make perfect sense to those who hold them, for their own personal reasons. I not only like to read another's opinion(s), but I also like to understand why it is that they hold them. This is in an attempt to gain and share understanding, not an attempt to dismiss the personal validity of another's viewpoint.

I do not normally use the terms "right" and "wrong" to assess anything.

I will come back later and check to see if this topic has generated any further interest...

The act of, or how it's performed?

Act of - People pick whatever strikes their fancy. Be it their heart, their head, or their nether regions.

Performed - On a most basic of levels a possible choice gets a list of points, good and bad. Whichever outweighs the other usually is what's chosen.

And are we talking about conscious or subconscious choices?

Not sure this is exactly on topic but a good talk
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/tony_robbins_asks_why_we_do_what_we_do.html

Zyther...

Although I have not previously directly addressed your posts, I have read them and appreciate the input. Regarding the latest...



I am not sure if I recognize a necessary distinction between the two above propositions, both of which seem to address the type(s) of influences which may or may not determine which choice is made in some cases of choosing.

Could it be possible to simplify the conceptual framework in such a way that all cases of choosing fit into it?

I think that what I am saying is that the most basic form of choosing must include some prior elements in order for that form to be given the value of choosing. In addition to this, the most complex form must also contain these same elements in addition to others which provide the complexity.

Without a subject, for instance, a choice cannot be made. Therefore, a subject must exist for the concept of choosing to be able to.



Do you believe that choosing is possible without conscious thought?



Billy...

Tony Robbins is a fantastic speaker. I wish I had the ability to hear the link that you posted. Instead, I was only able to read the conjecture...

I feel a little disappointed...

Thank you though.

How we make choices.

We are faced with so many choices/decisions every day that we are not able to give each one full cognitive treatment. Probably the greatest numbers of decisions we make everyday have their basis in heuristics.

All of our experiences are broken into bits and pieces by the brain for the purpose of categorizing. The shear number of decisions we are presented in a day, requires that we make use of heuristics, the ability to instinctually relate to experience by association. The fact that we categorize, as we do, allows us to ‘cut corners’ or to simplify and shorten an otherwise lengthy information gathering and rationalization process.

An example: I need to find a store clerk to answer a question and I don’t have time to waste. There’s a kid in isle 12 but his tattoos and piercings lead me away from him. There’s the old lady at the check out, but I’ve never seen her anywhere outside the checkout booth. There’s an older gentleman stocking a shelf but what would he know about bake ware? Then there’s the young, very wholesome looking woman, smiling as she arranges the product on a shelf. Who am I going to go to?

I have not thought these things in my head; I’m not even sure why I made the decision to speak to the woman or to pass up the others. I have used heuristics, and automatic association using the category of stereo types.

That’s just one example there are numerous way in which heuristics make our decision processes easier. Of course they are not always correct, but our experience has given us reason to believe in the short cut.

Another way we decide, believe it or not, involves considering other people. Once again, we don’t always rationalize in our own favor. A great amount of the time we rationalize our decisions based on what we think will make someone else, happy, or proud of us, etc.

Another way we make decisions is to keep from experiencing cognitive dissonance. Dissonance is when we act in a way that opposes our own moral or ethical values.

Sometimes our decisions, to please another, cause us dissonance. But instead of going through a long rationalization process for a decision we need to make now, we will rationalize, instead a decision we just made.

Example: I have been asked to lie, to cover for my boss. I don’t know the circumstances of the emergency for which I’ve been asked to lie. I’m in crisis myself because I don’t believe in telling lies and I KNOW from experience the trouble it can cause. I’m suddenly in a corner and I have to say something now. I lie.

I could spend the rest of day anxious, unable to properly function and I can’t do that, I’m covering for my boss. So I rationalize the decision I’ve already made. My boss is good person, and has never asked me to do this before; there must be a good reason. Jobs were at stake and how could I live with myself if I didn’t give my boss a chance to explain. The only chance for my boss to explain was for me to lie. I have now rationalized why I needed to lie.

Sometimes we have the luxury of taking time to do research, list pros and cons, consider the affects of our actions on others and compare to our own goals and desires. But in the end the decision we are making is leading to unknowable possibilities. In these situations there is no way to predict what one will choose, because no matter how much careful study is given to the decision process, it will ultimately be the personality of the individual that will end up being the deciding factor.

Is that what you were looking for, Creative?

Hi Red

"it will ultimately be the personality of the individual that will end up being the deciding factor."


Personality yes, but perspective too ... even our conscious and rationalized choices look different depending upon our frame of reference at the time ... and that shifts ...


Robin Sharma said:

"When we face hard times, we think the way we see the world reflects the way it really is. This is a false assumption. We are simply viewing the world from our hopeless frame of reference.

We are seeing things through sad and hopeless eyes... "

Anyone who has experienced clinical depression will certainly attest to the truth of that! I think of the "rose colored glasses" frame of reference as being just as pertinent.

While I do believe it possible for some people at times to have a - however brief - objective glimpse of reality, it sure isn't our every day walking-around state.

You are correct, I alluded to this but didn't address directly.

The process of making decisions is inclusive of our "state of mind". This is the reason for the U.S. law that incorporates the 3 day rescinds language; it was meant to prevent 'impulse' buying or coercion in selling.

Our current state of mind is something we almost never, consciously, consider in our decision process. Even if we do, we are often unable to rationally or realistically place our state of mind with any definitive reliability.

In another thread I explained how experiences are stored in memory, in bits and pieces. When we have an experience that touches on some emotionally charged bit memory, our body reacts, physiologically, which produces a state of mind equivalent to the one in our memory. Sometimes we don’t remember the entire memory; we only know we feel a certain way from the current experience.

Sometimes we do recall the memory and our choices are based on aversion. We don’t want the repeat the memory.

In the event of depression that is long term and unrelenting, there is usually a chemical imbalance. This imbalance interferes with our ability to react appropraitly to state of mind a current expereince should be giving us. This is definately not a state of mind in which one should be making any major decisions.

Di, strange, Artsy...

Thank you for your thoughts...

I feel as though your suggestions invoked another aspect of choosing, the aspect of personal belief and it's affects upon the perceptual faculties. The unconscious aspects are indeed key, especially to one who is unaware of their existence during the process of choosing.

On a more general note, could we say whether or not choosing is done within the unconscious or the conscious mind of the subject?My thoughts have entertained the following perspective, which has a few newer elements for me.

Choosing requires decision making. It is an act of consciously deciding a path of personal pursuit based upon that which is perceived and further believed to be of possible choice.

For the above statement to be true in all cases, the individual elements must necessarily exist in every logically conceivable situation of choosing.

To consciously choose invokes the need for the subject to be capable of perception, awareness, and cognition. If a choice is defined as a path of personal pursuit, then it also necessitates intent and/or purpose. If those two notions are held to be true in every conceivable application, then the idea that one can only choose that which is believed to be possible must necessarily follow, for one cannot intentionally choose that which is not perceived to be a possibility.



Does that make sense?

no Creative it does not make sense. I chose Obama over McCain though I don't perceive, think, or believe either is capable of producing the future that I envision.

One makes a conscious decision to choose, but the choice is always a combination of several things and they are not always included in the conscious effort.

This is one reason why so many argue that we do not have free will. Our choices are not ever 'freely' made, they are influenced in ways that are out of our control.

It is for that very reason that humanity has always place such high value in an ability to make and stick with committmants.

Once a decision has been reached and a committment made, it is our early learning of the value we place on committment that make us stick to something. We are taught that because in history a man's word was all important, it was all we had to offer in return for something.

It holds value still, more so than ever, because we now know that our decisions can move us from committments for ineffectual reasons. Reasons we can not even explain, because we may not even be aware of the influence behind our decisions.

I am not exactly sure that I understand your response Di...

According to what you wrote above, it would be safe to say then, would it not, that your choice was made believing that?

Therefore, you indeed did choose that which you believed to be a possibility. You chose an option which you believed would not satisfy what your wants of the future are/were.

I had said this...



You perceived what was, which was not what you wanted, then consciously decided based upon that perception.

Is it not possible to consciously choose that which is perceived, in spite of the fact that the options available do not satisfy your personal wants and/or needs?

state of mind is not a personal belief...and state of mind affects what we are able to see as possibilities in that moment. When the state of mind shifts so does what is seen as possible.




What is unconscious is often patterns ... prompting a reaction. The choice becomes whether to be victim to that or to be empowered by seeing them allowing one to excavate and reframe what is no longer valid.

When we recognize the patterns then a shift can take place broadening perspective. It doesn't matter how logical an argument ... it falls apart when built upon the shifting sands of what is hidden.

Choice is conscious ... the 'reaction' prompting the choice is not always ...




is it? I think it is more likely that personal history might bring up certain feelings of what might be probable ... that doesn't make it true of course ... it is just how things get interpreted within the context of what 'has' been in the past.

And while past creates our history ... our futures do not have to be dictated by it. We evolve all the time ... we refine our choices all the time ... we change our minds all the time...


All things are possible. If we limited our choices to what we believe is possible or even probable ahead of time then the world would still be flat ... man would not have gone into space ... a poor black girl with a funny name would not be one of the most influential people on the planet with a seat atop the richest people in the world list ... the earth would still be the center of the universe and on and on and on ...


True pioneers are the dreamers of dreams ... they are the believers in the impossible and make it real ... they are the ones who who explore the journey to see where it leads often sparking other discoveries ... they are not the ones who decide ahead of time what is possible...or probable...



Theodore Roethke said "What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible.'

when i choose to go to Afrika to treat in the camps, as i do every year , i also know ahead of time what to expect. I know that my efforts are fruitless for thousands, and but for a handful, i make the difference between life and death.

the situation in Sudan is hopeless but we still go.
the situation in Zimbabwe is impossible but my team is there now, what if we thought as you do Michael??

how selfish would that be?

unconditional love requires no choice....just dicipline.

bet that went swoosh right over your head...!!! lol

I have to agree with ArtGurl and blackball on this.

The reason is simple, you keep stating that decisions are 'consiously' made. That is the error that we are tying to explain.

Consciousness is awareness - we are only aware of the 'current' cognitive moment, cognitive being the key word. Because cognitive is what we are focused on, thinking about, in any given moment. But that is NOT all that influences our decisions.

There are unconscious values that affect our choices. The unconscious is where the sum total of all our experiences is stored. From past experience we are 'unconsciously' influenced, that unconscious experience is NOT brought into the cognitive process, but rather into the phsyiological process, by producing a 'state of mind'eqivalent to the unconscious past experience.

We are not aware of a thought (cognitive) only of a feeling, but feelings are often beneath the level of the cognitive. So when a person is torn between paths, it may simply be a 'feeling' that comes from an unconscious 'state of mind' that directs our course of action. "I just felt it was the right thing to do." "It just felt right." "I had a bad feeling about ... that's why I chose..." Or "My intuition (a feeling) directed my actions."

You see it now?

One other thing, blackball said


In just a few words this explains what I was trying to say about giving our word, or making committments. It takes dicipline, NOT, to fall prey to our 'unconscious' feelings. Intuition is a fallicy; Intuition is a feeling derived from a state of mind that was evoked from the unconscious.