This struggle of choices and morality begins with discernment of perception of goodness or badness being degrees of intention and consequences (a little or a lot) whether one is perceiving the good or bad action, deeds, or thoughts, as affecting oneself or affecting others involved in the relationship.
Thoughts, words, deeds, or actions, in themselves are not morally positive or negative, it’s their intent by the causal agent which affects the consequences as being either creative or destructive. We need to stop moralizing our speech and thoughts with goodness and badness and replace this dualistic approach to thinking with non-dualistic, non-conceptual terms which allow for integrative reasoning: not good or bad, but rather better or worse, not black or white but rather ‘ which shade of grey’.
When we are discerning in dualistic conceptual paradigm of good versus bad as extremes in reality we are making a choice; a choice which limits our perception and understanding of a situation or experience. Making better choices involves going beyond dualism towards integral reasoning which allows us to assess any situation from a paradigm of consequences and alternate choices without judging the cause or consequence as being on a spectrum of extremes between good and bad.
We are, in a limited sense, defined by our choices in that they indicate our reasoning and mode or perception. Our choices can only destroy us to the extent that we are conscious of consequences, internalize guilt or remorse, whether deserved or not, and allow our emotions to control our lives. Choices strengthen us when they are based on looking at the big picture of all the consequences which a choice can engender: only then can we say to ourselves: I made the ‘better’ choice or the ‘best’ choice.