Counterfactual Choosing

[tfrxsis]

One question I've been amateurishly interested in is the meaning of choice. I'd like to here your thoughts on a (probably unoriginal) thought experiment I devised in order to flesh out my perspective.

Suppose that scientists devised a theory of morality, with a description of our values, and that in this world humanity is presented with this knowledge. If, in response, humanity collectively decided to change its values, when:

• The theory was right, and that it predicted our response.
• The theory was right, but did not predict that we would change.
• The theory was wrong, and did not predict that we would change.
• The theory was wrong, but predicted that we would change.

In what sense would you believe that we chose our new values? Would you believe it makes sense to draw a distinction in the last hypothetical between a theory that was wrong because it predicted a change but missed the mark, a theory that was wrong because it predicted the wrong set of initial values?