The reason that I like this view is because it doesn't deny free will contrary to what most people think instead it says that we make decisions based on our inherently evil human nature that's not to say it's impossible to make a decision that goes against this evil human nature but most of the time most people are not going to make that decision because it would make them feel bad and it would go against their nature an example of this would be a choice between eating broccoli and eating pizza most people would probably choose the pizza because it tastes better even though the broccoli is probably more healthy to eat.
That’s a pretty solid analogy with the pizza and the broccoli. It definitely explains why most people take the path of least resistance.
The only thing is, if "free will" is just choosing what tastes best in the moment, it feels more like we’re just following an appetite rather than actually making a choice. To me, real freedom is when you can see that pizza, know your "nature" wants it, but choose the broccoli anyway because you have a bigger goal in mind.
If we just do what makes us feel good or what fits our "inherent nature," we’re kind of just running on autopilot. I think the real "will" shows up when you do the hard stuff that actually builds your character, even if it feels heavy or "bad" at the time. Otherwise, aren't we just passengers in our own bodies?
