If you accept the premise our brain is basically a computer doing what it thinks is best I don't think choice exists.
Choice would be more like an illusion when you reflect on memories and try to improve your rate of learning by thinking "what would happen if I did X instead of Y"
There are no choices in life?
Re: There are no choices in life?
I tried to write a thing but I'm too tired to write it properly. For the sake of providing information though you might find compatibilism a useful metaphysical school to read about. Compatibilists accept free will and determinism and view them both as mutually compatible without logical inconsistency.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/comp ... FreeDoOthe
I used to be a hard-deternimist myself and recently over the past two years softened my view into soft-determinism. There is near consensus between compatibilists and metaphysical libertarians that humans have free will, where libertarian here means accepting free will and rejecting determinism. Only around 12% of philosophers reject free will outright.
https://survey2020.philpeople.org/survey/results/4838
Also my intention with posting philosopher survey results is not to appeal to authority, there are cases, like the trolly problem for example, where I don't agree with consensus or even outright reject the question entirely. I'm posting this because it's useful for understanding a given question and the discussion around it to understand how contemporary philosophy views the question and look into the history of how a near consensus has formed.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/comp ... FreeDoOthe
I used to be a hard-deternimist myself and recently over the past two years softened my view into soft-determinism. There is near consensus between compatibilists and metaphysical libertarians that humans have free will, where libertarian here means accepting free will and rejecting determinism. Only around 12% of philosophers reject free will outright.
https://survey2020.philpeople.org/survey/results/4838
Also my intention with posting philosopher survey results is not to appeal to authority, there are cases, like the trolly problem for example, where I don't agree with consensus or even outright reject the question entirely. I'm posting this because it's useful for understanding a given question and the discussion around it to understand how contemporary philosophy views the question and look into the history of how a near consensus has formed.
