Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Or perhaps just utterly pedantic, regarding the nature of 'Choice'

85 replies

RevelsRoulette · 09/10/2013 14:22

If I am, I know I will be told (forcefully and with much swearing Wink and I can take it Grin

Just because you don't like your choices, doesn't mean you don't have them.

Just because choices are often between two equally shitty things, doesn't mean they aren't choices

Just because you are afraid to make a change, does not mean you are not making a choice to do nothing (doing nothing being in itself a choice)

Not wanting to do something is not the same as having no choice.

Not liking to admit that you have choices or have made choices, does not stop them from being choices

Bad choices are still choices.

You choose to do something, you don't have to do it. You only have to be ok with the consequences of your choice.

I am just so tired of arguing about the meaning of choice with my husband that it would be good to hear other views. Grin

OP posts:
Original poster
RevelsRoulette · 10/10/2013 16:19

Oh god no, when talking about what is choice, what it means to make choices, etc, it's a very very powerful example.

OP posts:
cornflakegirl · 10/10/2013 17:06

I agree with you - in all but the most extreme examples, there is a choice.

There probably was an expectation on your husband, from himself, and whoever he was asking the favour of, that he wouldn't rush off straight away. There was still a choice to flout social convention and take the consequences. There was also to the choice to not ask a favour of someone he didn't want to spend time with. Or, from another angle, to not agree to stay for a pleasant evening with a mate after asking a favour, when to do so would significantly inconvenience his wife.

I think we can often frame the issue as a lack of choice because that's genuinely how we feel about the situation, but that that can stop us thinking creatively about ways around the problem.

edam · 10/10/2013 17:12

very good points, Dahlen.

CailinDana · 10/10/2013 18:29

Choice is an illusion. We feel like we make a choice freely but in fact everything we do has a causal chain extending out behind it which led to that choice. Take a simple choice - muffin or banana. I choose banana. That is not a choice I made just out of the blue because some disembodied voice in my head told me to. I chose it because I am on a diet and I'm on a diet because I am affected by the judgement of mt peers that I'm fat and I'm affected because...and so on and so on. We are being that exist in a causal universe. We don't float outside it and we are affected by it as much as anything elsr that exists in our universe.

What's interesting is the psychology of choice - the way we assign responsibility for choice (eg a choice made when mentally ill is often seen as not belonging to the "real" (ie well) person. The way we justify choice (eg I choose to bf because it is best for my baby when in fact I choose it because she won't accept a bottle and I can't be bothered to make her) and the circumstances in which we feel we"have no choice."

CailinDana · 10/10/2013 18:45

It's also interesting that we tend to acknowledge the causal chain when it suits us (eg I was rude because she was rude first) and deny it when it doesn't (but she had no reason to be rude).

Original poster
RevelsRoulette · 10/10/2013 19:08

Cailin, that's really interesting. The idea of choice as an illusion. I can't quite get my head round that. Grin It's close to saying we have no free will. Close to? Hmm do I mean related to? Linked to? Is free will an illusion?

OP posts:
CailinDana · 10/10/2013 19:35

Well there's one theory that say it is revels.

Original poster
RevelsRoulette · 10/10/2013 19:44

That's an interesting theory. I'd like to read more about it. Do you have any links?

(that's a genuine 'do you have any links', not one of those god awful PA 'prove it' posts that piss me off so much Grin )

OP posts:
caroldecker · 10/10/2013 19:47

Free will may be an illusion. As far as we know, all life comes down to chemical reactions. The chemistry is known, so a suitable powerful computer and sensor could monitor every molecule in the world and work out the reactions in order and therefore predict the future.

YoureBeingADick · 10/10/2013 20:00

The fact that external factors led us to making the choice we did does not mean we had no choice. They were just factors that contributed to the choice we made. Choice isnt an illusion.

CailinDana · 10/10/2013 20:05

When you aay "we" ybad- what do you mean?

Revels start with descartes and work on from there - there's a lot to read on the topic!

YoureBeingADick · 10/10/2013 20:06

We = humans

notagiraffe · 10/10/2013 20:20

I think most people think of choice as having some connotation of empowerment. So two choices that are disempowering feel like no choice at all.
On a menu, there could be a choice of either moules frites or crab salad. For someone allergic to shellfish, that's not choice at all, even though technically they have options as to which food they'll opt to eat, to induce the anaphylactic shock. (Assuming in this surreal world that there's not the choice to decline food.)

But of course in real life, even when it's very hard indeed we usually have far more choices than we think we have, most notably, how we choose to react to and deal with bad times.

ShoeWhore · 10/10/2013 20:45

OP you might find Irvin Yalom's theory of existential therapy interesting.

Underpinning it is the idea of the 5 givens of existence: death, freedom and its attendant responsibility, isolation and meaninglessness.

He says that in order to embrace freedom one has to accept the consequences of our choices. ie we have far more choices than we think but we exclude some from consideration because we are not willing to countenance the consequences that would result.

(death is self explanatory; isolation is about the fact we are born alone and die along; meaninglessness is about having to find your own meaning to life. It's fascinating stuff!)

CailinDana · 10/10/2013 21:16

What it comes down to is whether you believe in something like a soul - the essence of a person that remains stable and unchanged throughout a person's life. Without a soul the idea of free will doesn't really make sense.

SinisterSal · 10/10/2013 21:26

God that sounds bleak ShoeWhore

ShoeWhore · 10/10/2013 21:39

It does doesn't it sinister But when you start to explore it further there is something very liberating about having freedom to choose whatever you want to do and being able to give your life its own meaning.

To be fair, the idea is that all problems that present in therapy are related to these givens so it's never going to be laugh a minute Grin

YoureBeingADick · 10/10/2013 21:41

Is this veering into spirituality or religion?

ShoeWhore · 10/10/2013 21:44

I'm not.

Trills · 10/10/2013 21:47

YANBU technically but rally all you are asking for is rephrasing.

Instead of "I didn't have a choice" you want people to say "I did have a choice but the alternative was even more hideous, and I am pissed off that the only choices available to me were all bad."

YoureBeingADick · 10/10/2013 21:59

Sorry shoe- i meant cailin with her mention of souls.

Trills · 10/10/2013 22:00

I like edam's comment about humans having a deep desire to believe that they are the masters of their own destiny.

If you believe that people for whom things go wrong have done something wrong, then you can believe that you can prevent things from going wrong for you, as long a you are vigilant. It's more comforting than believing that you can't control whether things go wrong or not.

lougle · 10/10/2013 22:24

I agree in principle that bad choices are still choices. That even doing nothing is a choice.

However, some people have more choices than others, given the same set of facts to choose from. So, unless you know all the circumstances of the chooser, you can't assess the quality of the choice or whether they had other more acceptable choices.

E.g. Child very unhappy in school due to bullying. Bullies come from two schools. Self-harming.

Person A may live in an area with poor schools, have very limited income, work full-time and support an elderly relative. Choices:

  1. Change child to sink school
  2. Home school
  3. Move to independent school
  1. Bully B attends there.
  2. Works full time and can't provide effective education
  3. Can't afford it.

What 'choice' do they have that they can make without causing crisis in the family?

Person B lives in a good school area, has supportive family networks and a stable income

  1. Change school to another good school
  2. Home school
  3. Move to independent school

3 real choices.

CailinDana · 10/10/2013 22:26

Not really ybad. It's the logical way of looking at the concept of choice. To really and truly choose freely there has to be some part of you that is not in any way subject to the causal chains that affect all other entities in the universe. Given that a human is the product of dna interacting with environment, unless there is some spirit/soul/thingummy that isn't determined by dna or environment then all "choices"are caused in some way by the person's dna or environment or a mixture of the two.

YoureBeingADick · 10/10/2013 22:33

I dont think any choice is truly a free choice in the way you describe- all choices are created, exist and are decided upon based on lots of different things. Choices come about differently for every single person based as a result of their life up to that point including factors not in their control (weather for example). I would need to know more about your definition of what a soul is before i could say whether i agree/disagree or even understand where you are coming from.