It is possible to want different desires (if you disagree, ask any recovering drug addict). So even conflicting desires can exist simultaneously on multiple planes of consciousness.
A powerful way to change your desires to be what you want them to be is to change your habits.
I like an idea mentioned by James Clear (author of the "Atomic Habits" book) that each action we take is a "vote" towards establishing or breaking a habit.
There are connections between this notion and neurochemistry, such as Hebbian learning.
Zooming out a bit, local communities of people who practice virtuous habits are an indispensable cornerstone of society, for by them we gain agency to desire and do what is virtuous.
That's a pretty big claim, and I'm the kind of person that tends to challenge almost everything ... but heck, I have to admit that I largely agree. Well said.
I've lived many places, and the lived experience in some particular places, in some particular ways, just works better. It often has to do with most people being both trusting and trustworthy.
I would add that _locality_ isn't only about spatial dimensions. Some online communities have high degrees of locality, in a sense.
> for by them we gain agency to desire and do what is virtuous.
Again, at first I was going to push back on how you used 'agency' here, but I think I see what you probably mean: being in a better environment _helps_ an individual to choose from a better set of options, allowing them to be the best version of themself.
Free will is really all about making decisions that guide the evolution of the universe, rather than being a powerless observer. The fact that our decisions are constrained due to circumstances does not change the fact that we make them.
As a doxastic voluntarist, I reject this notion entirely.
Do you hold such a view as a first principle? Or did you arrive at it via consideration of other factors?
You can't choose to be a doxastic voluntarist as much as you can't choose not to be one. One can only become one involuntarily.
> Do you mean to ask if someone can choose not to be a doxastic voluntarist?
No, I did not. :)
My question remains: "Do you hold such a view as a first principle? Or did you arrive at it via consideration of other factors?"
If you look closely, you can see my question doesn't assume choice was/wasn't involved. Simply how you got there.