Choice

A meme begins the process of intervention on a subconscious level, early in an individual's life when the body is still developing.
Genes to Memes.

I think one of the key advantages of nerve cells is the speed of the communication and processing. A huge advantage when competing against other mobile organisms, when it comes to controlling a territory. Movement alone requires lightning fast cellular communication to coordinate the organism.

Real time reactions to unpredictable - due to chaos and complexity - circumstances.
If an organism did not have some freedom to choose, then why evolve the costly organ of a brain at all?
If all were determined, and inevitable, including choice, then why the performance, the pretence?
A cosmic conspiracy?

Piaget, Jean wrote:

Intelligence is what you use when you don't know what to do.

Intelligence evolved to deal with the unforeseen, the unforeseeable; intelligence evolves to deal with chaos interacting with order.

If the brain, consciousness, is a looking back on events then it is a reaction of those past events. So, willing a choice, overcoming yourself, or whatever, is itself a re-action to past events. It is the organism, including it's past and present as one continuum, coming to know itself and in so doing choosing to accept or attempt to modify aspects of that limited self-knowledge as it moves into the future.
Okay, but can it do this without the past? Or is it's overcoming purely random or without cause? How would this be done?
Where does the will to overcome your self arise from? Is it self-created?  

What is the basis of a choice? Is it founded in the past or does it arise from nothing?
Does an organism, making a choice, do this disconnected from contributory events or processes? Is it free from causative events that would influence that choice? Can it make a choice without being the effect of those past processes, which it is the manifestation of?

As far as I can see we make choices based on our inherent needs as human organisms in tandem with our limited knowledge of ourselves and the world, with respect to whatever particular objective we have, the objective typically based upon all of the above. Ie, I am hungry, I choose to find food. I will die one day, I will find a woman. I am weak, I will train. I am ignorant, I will learn. etc.
These choices aren't based on nothing. Their meaning and their value arises from the fact that they are not based on nothing. If they were based on nothing they would be meaningless 'choices'.

apaosha wrote:

Okay, but can it do this without the past? Or is it's overcoming purely random or without cause? How would this be done?

Consciousness is a looking back, at past, and existence is a continuous movement forward, in the present, as presence.
Presence is dynamic it is movement/momentum.
So, self-cultivation, training, is making the necessary changes automatic, unconscious, so that awareness is unnecessary.
This is why I mention martial arts, where training consists in making specific reactions unconscious - second nature - overriding natural, ingrained, reactions, i.e., fight/flight.

apaosha wrote:

Where does the will to overcome your self arise from? Is it self-created?  

It comes from man's existential anxiety. A desire to control oneself and the world within him - it is nihilistic.
A by-product of self-awarness.
When man develops self-cosnciuosnss he can perceive himself in the third-eprson - objectively - exposing him to another source of anxiety: perceiving himself as others do, as another.
This is, in my view, the basis of nihilism, which develops into a world-view with multiple spiritual and political ideologies, i.e., methods of coping, dealing with this new source of anxiety.
Animals don't want to change themselves because they do not know themselves, cannot know themselves as a man can....if he dares.
IQ is what determines the degree of self-awarness; the individual's constitution, his personality, determines if he has the psychology to accept what this self-awarness exposes to him, and how he can endure it.
Know Thyself is about endurance - constitution, i.e., honesty, courage, intelligence is a necessary but not the determining trait.

This is where things diverge.
"Overcoming oneself" can either be a negation of self - a denial of what self-awarness exposes to a man about himself - or it is an acceptance leading to a desire to adjust oneself according to an ideal, an objective - self-cultivation begins with an honest and clear acceptance of oneself as one is perceived by others.
This is important for a social organism, like man.
Here empathy is also crucial. Does a man perceive himself as another would and sympathise with this perception, antipathize with it or is objectively indifferent - as much as this is possible - to it, leading to an understanding of another.
Sympathy simply projects oneself in another place and perceive oneself as oneself, projected into another place.
It is a skewed perception of oneself, based on sympathetically adopting another perspective based on their reactions towards you - when you interact.
Inter-Subjectivity is this collective sympathizing, adopting a shared self-awarness.
This is why the majority insist that empathy is synonymous with sympathy, and if it isn't then it must be antipathy - are you part of the herd, the collective, or an enemy? It is a form of uniformity.
All are sympathetic toward the projection of themselves via another. All use others as a mirror to perceive themselves, and the other must not contradict this projection; must not be negative towards the sympathetic self-assesment.

Jung's "collective unconscious" can be thought of as this collective sympathy towards individual members of a group, helping all cope with existence, and primordial fears/anxieties concerning mortality, sexuality etc.
Sexuality is itself a way of coping with mortality.

Yeah, so self-awarness is what this "need to overcome oneself" comes from.
An awareness of oneself as another perceives you - objectively - exposing an individual to a perspective that makes him/her feel insecure, vulnerable....anxious, nervous, i.e., self-conscious.
This is the negative side of self-awareness - the price, the cost, for a distinct advantage.

apaosha wrote:

What is the basis of a choice? Is it founded in the past or does it arise from nothing?

No, it is rooted in past.
If we think of self as part of a continuum - past (determined) - present (dynamic, determining) - future (unknown, yet to be determined) then a man awakens to himself (thrown into the world) as a dynamic movement/momentum which he then directs (will). There is no point in space/time when man is not moving or willing which way to move, as much as he can - determined by his strength, power.
Existence = interaction, dynamic.
The concept of non-existence is a theoretical state of inertia - absolute - which only exist as a vague idea in the mind and nowhere else.
Life is the awareness of this movement/momentum willing itself towards objectives, or away from probabilities. A control over this momentum/movement which is mostly unconscious. Consciousness is not necessary, since life is on autopilot...most of tis willing is ingrained in its DNA as a programming.
Sophisticated life evolves a nervous system which begins to be able to usurp this automatization - making it more adaptive to the unforeseen, in real time.
This is why the idea that man has no free-will, is ludicrous - it would make consciousness impotent and unnecessary.
The reason consciousness evolves is to deal with the unforeseen - as no plant or amoeba could - usurping the programming via experience, i.e., learning, self-cultivation, repetition... making an individual more flexible, more adaptive to environmental shifts and the effects of chaos or order.

apaosha wrote:

Does an organism, making a choice, do this disconnected from contributory events or processes? Is it free from causative events that would influence that choice? Can it make a choice without being the effect of those past processes, which it is the manifestation of?

Chaos is what necessitates a real time reaction to existence.
Two competing sources of memory: DNA (Body) and Experience (mind).
Mind is what usurps the inherited. Also what produces nihilism, as the exaltation of mind over body.
Mind gradually gains control over the body's automatic reactions through consistent, slight adjustments.
Self-awarness makes this imposition more effective. This is the advantage of self-cosnciousness.
I've already spoken about the cost above - the dark lining to this silver cloud.

apaosha wrote:

As far as I can see we make choices based on our inherent needs as human organisms in tandem with our limited knowledge of ourselves and the world, with respect to whatever particular objective we have, the objective typically based upon all of the above. Ie, I am hungry, I choose to find food. I will die one day, I will find a woman. I am weak, I will train. I am ignorant, I will learn. etc.
These choices aren't based on nothing. Their meaning and their value arises from the fact that they are not based on nothing. If they were based on nothing they would be meaningless 'choices'.

I've given my positions on need/desire/want.
This dynamic, interactive, movement/momentum produces attrition - loss of energies, deterioration of the organism coherence...experienced as need/suffering.
Successfully replacing these energy losses leads to excess and the sensation of desire - a need to expunge excess energies, towards self-development, procreation, art etc.

Choice an expression of the will's movement/momentum towards the fulfillment of a need (physical) or the expunging of excess (mind) - the mind experiences lack as ennui, but that's another issue.
Brain is an energy hungry organ, and mind experiences this as excess energies the body has provided for it - encased as it is within a skull, unlike the body which is mostly exposed, having the skeleton internally.
This difference is crucial.
Personality, as I've defined it, is the manifestation of organ hierarchies, so the degree the brain dominates the organism determines its world-view, i.e., if it perceives the world from the perspective of lack or excess.
Here environmental conditions are also crucial, determining the ease to which the body's needs are met, consequently determining the degree of excess the mind experiences.
Hedonism is the body placing need/desire above truth.

So, we are constantly choosing, because we are in a state of continuous interactivity - movement/momentum, existence.
We are never inert, in a state of inactivity, in a here/now. There is no here/now, only movement.
We gain awareness and with it the potential for control over some of our choices, but not all. This is only possible/probable if and when we are aware, honest and willing to put the effort into sharpening, increasing this control, to the degree that we can.
This mental usurping requires great effort and time, and maintenance, because once we relax we revert to our original, genetic, programming.
But it gets easier with repetition - exercise.

We use different terms to refer to the same thing.

Energy - at work.
Momentum/movement is energy.
Interactivity.
Different patterns, different rhythms, momentums interacting, causing friction.
Friction producing attrition.
Life experiences this as need.
Need left unsatisfied is experienced as pain, suffering. When successfully and consistently satisfied this produces excess - libido, desire for expunging excess once needs and growth have been sufficiently satisfied.

There is no nothing.
Nothing is not nothingness, as the easterners say.
All is energy.
What man refers to as void, nothing, is what lacks a pattern or the pattern is too complex or too subtle to be perceived using the senses or technologies that extend the senses.

Nothingness, nil, is a theoretical concept - an abstraction that simply inverts the experienced.
Since existence is dynamic interaction - energy - it has no beginning and no end. it only goes through cycles.
Cycles of increasing and decreasing chaos.
We experience decreasing order, increasing chaos, as linear time - movement towards near-absolute randomness, i.e., energies lacking pattern.
We also call this expanding space/time, or infinity.
We measure it with time.
Time is based on human metabolic rates, or quartz vibrations, or day/night cycles, or some reliable objective standard like that.
It measures change; change is movement, interaction, energy.

Now we know why nil is god to postmoderns and Jews....and absolutists.
Most are self-deciving or ignorant of their convictions and their implications.
They worship non-existence...and since non-existence does not exist it must remain an idea, an abstraction.
In the mind.
Transmitted from mind to mind semiotically, linguistically, numerically.
An idea with no external, objective, referent.....vague, obscure, undefinable, inconceivable, mysterious, mystical.
They worship a relief from existence. Salvation.
The basis of messianism.

Most people believe in nothingness, in nil, because they've been tricked, seduced by their primal need to escape to not suffer.
A secret desire to die, they conceal with sublime imagery, words, prose....perfection.
There is no perfection.
Perfection implies an absolute, the non-existent, non-existence itself.
They worship a collective lie - an idea that cannot be realized; an ideal that if realized would end existence.
They worship the end of existence - uniformity, the singularity.
In the meantime they indulge in hedonism to cope with the real. They indulge in poetics, in words.

See cRap and its followers.

The Rational Male had an interesting tag line in one of his clips.
It read like this:
Males value love. Females love value.

Appropriate.

What does choice expose?
Judgement.
What is Judgement?
Juxtaposition.
In its primal, rudimentary form, of self with other.
Later it develops the ability to abstract and to perceive itself and an-other from a theoretical third-person perspective, that leads to objectivity and necessitates the defensive reaction of nihilism for some to cope with this perspective.
a perspective that also makes the ability to evaluate self and other in relation to an idea/ideal.
Consciousness is a continuous process of juxtaposing abstractions, created by collecting internal and, primarily, external data.
Nihilism adjusts this proportionality of external/internal sources of data so that the esoteric sources negate or usurp exoteric, sensual data. Its ideal would be the esoteric totally negating all exoteric sources.

Since order is another way of saying pattern and patterns are consistent, repetitive, predictable, this juxtaposition is between patterns, or unities of patterns.
In the rudimentary phase this is what creates attraction/repulsion, the unity of patterns attracting or being attracted to what is closest to its aura, its combined resonating patterns.
This is the primal source of attraction. Energy. Aura. In its most basis form - one plants can benefit from without requiring a nervous system.

Later when brains develop to a certain ;level can the mind be attracted - ideologically (memetic) - to what the mind is repulsed by - organically, naturally (genetic).
Mind/Body dissonance. Leading us to the present age with transsexuality, the epitome of mind/body dissonance exposing an individuals disharmony with itself and the world that made him/her possible.
Death worship.
It seduces all those born with unfit mutations, sheltered by manmade systems from natural consequences.
Power of Nil.

Victims....attracted to the ideologies (memes) promising salvation, relief, an escape from reality, from nature, form the world as it is.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
When stupidity cannot understand what it can only imitate superficially.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Choice is illusory. Appearances are superficial.
Comforting mythologies for the conformist mind.

Randomness necessitates choice.
Necessity, mother of all invention and innovation.
Otherwise there would be no reason for choice to evolve, as a mere empty display.
Choice would be entirely unnecessary, not even as a trick, a lie, an illusion.

Nihilism begins with the idea/ideal and then tries to integrate the act, the perceived, into this idea/ideal.
Realism begins with the aesthetic, the act, and then creates ideas/ideals from there.

We see how nihilism is realism inverted.

This is obvious in choice, as an expression of will, which can then be evaluated as to how free it is - the degree of its freedom indicating the degree of its power.
The nihilist begins with the idea/ideal, the abstraction, the concept, and then tries to fit into it the perceived.

so in the first case all errors are ascribed to the idea, that has failed to fully represent the real.
this is the opposite of how nihilism works. It begins with the idea, as a give, as an absolute, certain, sacred....and all errors are then blamed on the real - it is the real that failed to express the perfection, the completeness, the certainty, the wholeness of the idea/ideal, so it must be the real that must be changed in relation to the idea/ideal, and not the idea/ideal in relation to the real.

So, in free-will, choice being its action, cannot be true, because the action of choice must be concealing a higher force or a higher idea that is determining it.
The insanity follows as a man can experience himself choosing, and experience others making choices but then claim that this is illusory, or some determining idea is behind it, like a hidden agency, or that whatever is chosen could not have not been chosen, after the fact, i.e., fatalism.
Many psychological reasons why the mind would insist that its own abstraction be placed as the pre-existing, and that choice does not occur in the mind since it is activity that the mind perceives after the fact, and many life forms, like plants, do not require a nervous system nor a mind to display will, and choice.

Why does this insanity matter?
Because it is the foundation of messianism.
The idea that a man or a nation or a tribe is acting on behalf of a higher purpose, a higher agency; that it has been chosen for a divine plan.
This superstition is dangerous.
Reason can have no effect on it.
It is zealotry, fanaticism.

Being self-consciuus means we are aware of making conscious or unconscious choices, based on conscious or unconscious judgements. We have no choice but to choose because we become aware of our existence as dynamic interaction - thrownness, Dasein.
just as we become aware that our every choice has moral/ethical implications as it always refers and defers to the wellbeing of a collective, whether it be a species - genetically based - or a group/culture/society - memetically based.

The choice not to choose is, itself, a choice, just as amorality is itself moral stand.

Choice, expression of judgment, is evaluated in relation to a conscious or unconscious objective.
The objective is evaluated in relation to its consequences - how it manifests in reality, in space/time. If it is never applied it remains "perfect" as a theory that has never been tested in reality, in space/time.
Therefore all consequences, known and unknown, intentional or not, foreseen or not, can be used to evaluate an objective and the actor's understanding and performance.
A repetition of the same consequences - intentional or not, negative or positive - indicates the essence of the objective, relative to the real world, or in relation to the environment it was applied in.
All variances in the consequences can be ascribed to the actor, the performer, exposing his understanding and his abilities to apply the theoretical.

Nihilistic objectives are by definition non-applicable, since they contradict or deny the very world they are to be applied within. They remain eternally theoretical.
If they are applied in real space/time they always fail and the degree of their failure exposes the degree of their nihilism, and the degree of accuracy in their application by the actor/performer.
A pattern emerges.
Since all nihilistic objective fail, to some degree, all must create excuses and justification to be reapplied.
Nihilism develops the art of linguistics and excuses as a means of preserving the theory despite its inapplicability.
Successful nihilistic dogmas/ideologies are always accompanied with a variety of justifications and excuses, evolved over time after continuous failures.  
Obscurantism, mysticism, occultism, is a method of justifying and excusing.

If life had no agency then for what reason would there be struggle, conflict?
All would be determined.
Why the farce?
Why the unnecessary suffering?

If individuals had no choice, no degree of free-will, why the pretence?
Why would life need to be tricked?

Do these people who claim life has no agency and choice is an illusion understand how they are 'debunking natural selection and evolution theory' and implying that there is an absolute, divine, totalitarian entity determining all - the creationist position is what they are advocating only they've replaced Abraham's one-god with universe, and Abraham's omnipotent, omniscient divinity with absolute order; they've secularized Abrahamism by renaming the same Biblical concepts.

What are the limits of freedom, as it pertains to will?
Options.
A will's power, but also a will's awareness, being a quality of its power; finally the will's control over an organism's aggregate energies and its courage, which might be placed in the category of resistance.
How much resistance a will can overcome, but also risks overcoming, because every choice produces subsequent options, most of which are unforeseeable, necessitating a conscious or unconscious evaluation of its power to deal with the unforeseeable, i.e., confidence.

Choice is the event of will – will placed within space/time. Will is a continuous affirmation of choice – directing an organism towards a chosen objective; movement, motive, revealed through the objective.
In the case of objectivity itself the cosmos, i.e., existence, is the objective, exposing the individual organism's motives as attempting to become liberated from organic motives. An objective exposes individual motive and motive exposes the spirit of an individual – the quality of its mind/body synthesis; its inconspicuous processes of judging and evaluating.
In the case of more objective individuals the mind dominates the body's organ hierarchy, but does not reject nor deny them.
In the case of nihilism the mind dominates so as to deny and reject the body – its motive is not the existent but its denial and replacement with a completely noetic ideal, i.e., negation of the physical, tangible, experienced, sensory world.
Its inconspicuous objective is an imagined anti-cosmos – the complete or arbitrary inversion, or negation of a sensorial, experienced, tangible world; an entirely subjective motive sparked by need/desire and continuously fueled by emotions, especially fear/anxiety, the mother of them all.

Value judgements are the foundations of Evolution Theory. What an individual values, and to what degree, is what we refer to as judgement; judgement is the necessary precursor to the act of choice. Adaptation refers to learning and adjusting evaluations, which alter or adjust past choices.
Choice is the act of free-will, and value judgements determine the quality of judgements, expressed as choices, which we describe as natural selection.
The choice is not due to some external agency but refers to the individuals that, through their choices, determine the consequences to themselves and their environment.
Selection is not imposed upon life by some entity named ‘nature’ – god, Deus – but is the sum total of choices made by all interacting living organisms, based on their subjective judgements, i.e., evaluations, expressing the quality of their subjective awareness and understanding of dynamic objective circumstances.
Good judgements lead to choices that produce successful or expected outcomes; bad choices lead to failures, and the unexpected, necessitating adjustments/adaptations, or that suffer terminal consequences and are filtered out of the gene pool. [ MANifesto: Nature – Free-Will – Choice]
Choice is essential to natural selection. ‘Will’ is how we refer to its fluid continuity, intentionally directing an organism towards an objective, constantly adjusting, i.e., correcting, its course; ‘will’ accurately describes what ‘choice’ spasmodically implies, as existential fluidity, i.e., intentionality. [ MANifesto: Identity – Structure of Self – Will]
Necessity determines the quality and quantity of an individual organism’s objectives, i.e., needs, desires and the degree to which they influence an individual’s judgements, but it does not determine how it attains them, nor in what sequence, since this is determined by dynamic interactive circumstances.
Success/Failure is the indeterminate factor, dependent on the individual’s quality of judgements, necessitating constant adjustment/corrections, i.e., learning.
The speed and the accuracy of this leaning is also determined by an individual’s inherited qualities and the degree to which it has cultivated them through repeating failures that did not result in terminal consequences – ‘what does not kill me make me stronger [sic.].’

Dynamic interactive circumstances, i.e., environment, is not entirely ordered. Chaotic energies contribute to its dynamism.
This makes judgement doubly significant in determining natural selection outcomes.
It is because of chaotic energies that life must evolve the ability to adjust/correct its actions in real time - speed and accuracy being determining factors, i.e., intelligence, awareness etc.

The basis issue with the act of choice is, why does it exist at all, i it is an illusion - as degenerates insist.
Why would it evolve, at all, if it offered no advantage?

If we could not have chosen otherwise, then why choose at all; why be given options?

There is no one choice applicable to all, because not all have the same strengths and weaknesses, and not all have the same motives, and objectives.
A choice is determined by the objective but also by the particularities of the individual's inherited potentials.
Those who same an objective - climbing to the top of a mountain, let's say - may CHOOOSE to take different routes toward the same destination, determined by whim, or by their estimation of the cliff, and of their own abilities.

Usually, a clim instructor used an average climber as his standard to map out an optimal, the best, course up the same mountain.
This help manual does not consider the sub-stadard climber or the gifted, risk taking climber into consideration, nor does he tell the world they must climb this mountain in this way.
He simply describes the optimal route if one CHOOSES to climb this particular mountain, and is of average physical ability and has an average risk tolerance.
He may then ad addendum for the novice or an expert climber....describing the "BEST WAY" up and the BEST method" to attain the height, based on his experience.
Climbers can choose to ignore his advice and do as they please....and then suffer the consequences or the rewards of accomplishing a feat with no guidance.

Again....why would we evolve the ability to learn if choice were determined and inevitable?
If we could not have chosen otherwise, or to refrain from acting, then why do we learn at all?

What or who is selecting when we speak of evolution and natural selection?
What is being selected and by whom if the actors have no agency?
Who and why was law & order determined if all is inevitable?
Why impose an extra layer of control if we have no real control, according to degenerates?
How does law & order, or morality, work, if it does work, if men cannot choose other than what they do choose?

Who is playing this game on us poor innocent victims, made to suffer an additional pain when we realize our fate is not determined by anything we do, or choose, or judge.
Sadomasochistic cosmos?
A sadistic god?

Or is the 'game' being played by degenerates on themselves?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] also makes the idea expressed in this vid, of a universe that can be known, absolutely and completely, impossible. Omniscience is impossible.
One can never know all the laws governing the cosmos – laws being manmade rules referring to an understanding – because only order can follow rules, chaos, by definition, has no rules; chaos, defined as randomness, not complexity, is unpredictable, only patterns, order, is predictable, and knowable, and perceptible.
Chaotic energies – Dark Matter? – cannot be perceived, nor can any laws be found governing them.
We can only perceive chaos through its effect on order, as the unforeseen, always subtle, but accumulating over time. Therefore, history repeats, because humans are ordering agencies and history describes human interactions over time, but it never repeats exactly the same way, because of different choices imposed upon them by chaos.
History describes the efforts of men to create absolute order, so one would expect it to be more predictable, but all we can find are predictable ways of dealing with man's failures to create absolute order.
Morality and Law & Order are human attempts to "correct" the chaotic part of existence.

Thoughts on value-judgements

*Only life can value and judge, i.e., evaluate, because only life has needs/desires.

*Need/Desire determine the evaluation of value by a subject - subjective evaluation.

*An object/objective is the focus of a subject's evaluation.

*The object/objective's availability, its distance, its accessibility, factor's into the subject's evaluations/judgments of its value relative to its needs/desires.

*Environment determines the object/objectives availability, accessibility, distance relative to the subject, i.e., adjusting its value.

*There are two types of environments: natural and manmade, and maintained.

*Natural environments have no intentions, no values, no objectives, no will.

*Manmade environments have the values, intentions, objectives of a collective of subjects and shared ideals, therefore they may conflict with an individual's objectives, evaluations, judgements.

*A judgement that remains in the mind only affects the organism - tis organizational environment. It has no direct contact with the environment outside the organism.

*A judgement, an evaluation that is applied, is externalized, and placed in contact with the external environment - interactive, affecting and being affected by it.

*This externalization of an individual organism's subjective judgements is called 'choice.' The act of choosing indicating the organism's will, intent, direction.

*Once the subject externalizes its judgement through choice - will - it places it in direct contact with environment determining the judgement's quality, i.e., its accuracy, effectiveness, its truth.

*Success/Failure indicates this quality of judgement.

*Success/Failure juxtaposes the subject's intent with the consequences of its act of choosing.

*Consequences are deemed positive/negative relative to the subject's objective, i.e., its expected outcome, its desired outcome.

*An objective evaluation of consequences - feedback from the subject's movement towards its objective - determines the subject's adjustments, corrections, adaptations of its choices.

*A subject can be conscious or unconscious of its object/objectives.

Any context, any circumstance, can be applied where subject - intentional agency - its objective and its environment are included in a triangulation calculating the quality of the object/objective and/or the subject's judgment/choices.
In the case of a manmade environment then there are two intentional subjects, i.e., an individual and a collective.
Morality refers to the collective's innate objectives, evolved through natural selection because they offer a benefit, ana advantage go the collective's survival and reproductive potentials.
Ethics refers to manmade collective environments, and their collective ideals, objectives, motives - linguistically encoded and imposed, promoted, enforced, usually through law & order or the abstraction of god which makes self-enforcment possible.

Action remains central.
The easiest way to determine which judgement - choice - is superior is to apply it via an action....then comparing the expected consequences with the actual ones.
This can be done either directly or indirectly.
In fact science is based on precedent and the indirect comparison of expectations and actual consequences.

A subject perceives and processes interactions, interprets them, and then converts them back to actions testing the quality of its own perceptions and interpretations.

Cost of Codependence
All value judgements have a moral component. Most offer evaluations without applying them in real time.
If they are converted to actions most expect to be protected from the negative, often unexpected, consequences, as an innate right or a moral imperative, deserving collective interventions to individual actions, choices; mitigating, absorbing, and disseminating them evenly within a group. This moral justification cultivates the sense that all value judgements are equally true or equally untrue, and that all individuals are equally prone to make mistakes. A universalization of consequences maintains the delusion of equality, contradicting the processes of natural selection.
Even among self-proclaimed immoralist degenerates, claiming the high ground of ‘free-spiritedness,’ a self-serving conviction persists that the collective has a moral obligation to step-in and protect an individual from its bad judgements, expressed through its bad choices. Underlying it all is a psychological imperative founded on the anxiety that all individuals, sooner or later, make bad choices and ought to come to the rescue of another so as to compel others to come to their aid.
A Golden Rule of cooperative interdependence that repeats and reaffirms the comforting lie that all individuals are equally prone to make bad judgements and choices.
The economics are clear to a rational objective mind: it is advantageous to help those that fall into continuous errors so as to maintain the probability of them coming to the aid of an individual that rarely does so. The sense of parity maintains reciprocity.