Challenging Choices—Part 2

An insidious process that sometimes is presented to us when evaluating options is the relativization or normalization of unhealthy choices. When ethics and quality gradually decrease over time, society's standards gradually fall. A generation ago parents could have some confidence that their kids wouldn't be exposed to excessive violent or sex scenes on TV or at a movie. Today, a parent stands little chance of avoiding such harmful exposure. Years past, people could be expected to be reasonably polite to each other, while today we face online attacks if we post anything slightly controversial. Another stark example of relativism: Donald Trump makes George W. Bush look almost acceptable.

A situation that can make our choice more difficult is when we are faced with a binary or dualistic offering. We in the West tend to think dualistically, so a choice is often posed as right or wrong, good or bad. With such a clear distinction, it ought to be clear which is the better selection. For example, we in the US most always have only two voting choices: either Democrat or Republican—when often, in fact, neither candidate would do a decent job in office. Furthermore, an equally-divided, polarized society seems to offer only two choices in any given situation—either of which is anathema to one side or the other.

Finally, when pondering the many choices we are faced with, it is important to recognize that, in many cases, not all people have a choice at all. Or, equally unjust, all choices are bad for them. How does a parent in a poor neighborhood find decent food or a school for her kids? How does a person with mental health problems get counseling, if they are homeless? What kind of suitable job can a person find, if they live in a rundown, crime-ridden part of a city? What does someone suffering from a debilitating disease do, when they can't afford health insurance, or it has just been capriciously canceled on them? What does a person threatened by and running from gang violence in El Salvador or the Democratic Republic of the Congo do, when safer countries refuse to let them in? For those of us who are advantaged enough to be able to make choices, what responsibility do we have to those who can't?

Yes, life is an unending series of choices. Evolution has favored those who made good choices. They usually go on to reproduce and pass that ability in their offspring. For simple animals, it is often genetic luck that enables them to choose wisely—the luck of having inherited fortunate genes.

For us humans, the challenge can be far more difficult, given that our society is so complex. We can add to the difficulty by mistreating each other and being deceitful. That's a prime reason why I left city life many years ago and chose a simple life in the country. Out here I am faced with far fewer equivocal and spurious choices.