In the previous post, I attempted to establish the idea that choice is essentially an oxymoron and that we are forced into every specific action based entirely on what our brain conceives is the most satisfying one.
Because I realize that the maximization of satisfaction is the ultimate goal for all people, the idea that philosophy should be "practical" and immediately applicable is favorable to me. (More like Spinoza, less like Nietzsche) So I will now demonstrate a way that we can benefit from the acceptance of our absence of choice.
Part of achieving the goal of maximized satisfaction includes avoiding (or isolating) all "feelings" that reduce your satisfaction. I would say that "guilt" is generally one of these feelings. However, "guilt" and "regret" are flawed as concepts because of the illusion of choice. I'll explain:
At the time of choice, we have no real decision to make, other than to follow our unavoidable immediate desire quenching. Because there is no real decision, the person has actually done nothing to choose this action or outcome, and therefore can not be "blamed". This gets tricky - because you are still physically responsible as a cause of the responding events. However, it is not your "choice" to have maximized satisfaction in the particular action, so it is really not you that has caused this to happen, it is a number of external factors that caused you to find maximized satisfaction in a particular outlet. Take a murderer for instance:
The murderer feels most satisfied when he kills someone. If he doesn't kill someone, he doesn't feel as satisfied. He never decided what satisfies him the most, throughout his entire life, external factors shaped his desire complexes. In essence, it is not his fault that he kills people, it is the fault of everything ever that lead him to find most satisfaction in killing. HOWEVER, this is not to say that he should not be punished - which leads me to my next point.
The best situation for any society is maximized satisfaction for all peoples in the society. While "GUILT" and "BLAME" don't exist as far as personal responsibility, "PUNISHMENT" must still exist in order to come closer to achieving this ultimate goal. Let's say the murderer is caught and found to be physically responsible for what we consider to be a "crime". This is what I would essentially be saying to them:
"I understand that it is not your fault that you find most satisfaction in killing. In fact, you are simply a vessel acting to quench desires and experience the resulting emotions. Unfortunately for you, our society also understands that allowance of these events and the knowledge that your free existence hinders a specified amount of potential satisfaction, it is in our best interest that you (insert supportive punishment here)."
This is just one applicable consequence of the realization of a lack of a choice. Eventually I'll likely clarify what it means to be a "personal utilitarian", what I consider to be the simplest and most honest world view, that also is a very key idea in almost any moral consideration.
