I thought this was pretty interesting. I agree with her line of thinking on how hard choices can be 'on a par', and how the action of deciding is linked with creating reasons to support one choice or another. Whenever I get into political arguments with friends, or general arguments online, it's always interesting to see the reasons that people come up with for supporting their position, much more than the position that they take.
Hm, interesting stuff. But it seems to me that this means that most people then avoid hard choices since most people seem to be just drifting around, not truly pursuing what they want.
I do have a remark though. I don't agree with the concept of creating an identity out of our choices. Sure, our actions do determine who we are and who we become, but in creating an identity out of our past, we are limiting ourselves to only our past being able to define us. While our past does influence who we are as a collective of our past experiences and actions we take (but not so much the choices we make!), we must never allow to it to hinder further growth. e.g. If somebody wants to be a graphics designer, but they haven't drawn anything in their life, that doesn't mean they can't become one even if they aren't one right now. Start drawing NOW if you want to be a graphics designer.