On Autobiographical Memory, Semantic Memory, and "Free Will"

I've come to a conclusion regarding my autobiographical memory, which can perhaps be extrapolated to a general sense: I have little or no control over what my mind has stored as memories, if I perceive a more random pattern and/or variably related to my tastes and desires. For example, regarding my desire to preserve certain lived moments, which I also believe is a common desire. And the equally common frustration of realizing that, in reality, our minds don't consult us to know what we'd like to keep as memories. I also need to emphasize that I've never made an effort to direct my mind to store what I'd like and erase or deprioritize what I don't want to keep as memories. However, perhaps the visceral feeling that there isn't even a minimal possibility of establishing this control may have contributed to never attempting this type of mental exercise, as it's more of a theoretical extrapolation than a true one. But what seems more like an extrapolation, at least partially true, is that this level of passivity we exhibit regarding our autobiographical memory can also be considered feasible regarding our semantic memory. I say partially because, a priori, it seems we exhibit a greater capacity for control, and not just for storing information—that is, for being able to direct our cognitive abilities based on what we've memorized as techniques or learning. It seems... Or, it could be that this perception is more of a subjective impression, a "wishful thinking" or positive thinking, than a true fact. It could be that we simply follow predetermined tendencies, and for many of us, this happens completely unconsciously, made as if they were legitimate decisions and not simply an extreme conformity to our own nature. Even regarding what appear to be specific details seemingly related more to our personalities than to our cognitive abilities—for example, my interest in the humanities, and especially geography, which I began to display in my second childhood, and which also developed or confirmed itself as a true vocation—which would not be simply an interest that arose randomly early in my life, but a reflection of more intrinsic aspects of my psycho-cognitive profile: the constitutive morphology of my brain and hormonal patterns, for example. In other words, I'm trying to say that no one becomes interested in certain topics without underlying factors, more intrinsic to their own biology, and this may mean that we also lack full control over the direction our intelligence takes, through a more direct route, by semantic memory. I see in myself, simultaneously, this illusory impression of cognitive self-control and a perception of a lack of choice, if I really didn't consciously or voluntarily decide to like geography and dislike math. For it to be simply a matter of choice, theoretically, upon exposure to these disciplines, I should have demonstrated similar levels of learning in both and, therefore, decided on one of them. Even so, this still doesn't mean that, in this scenario, there would be a real possibility of choice, especially since this attraction we display to our intellectual or other interests, again, never appears "out of nowhere," but based on our own cognitive, psychological, hormonal characteristics... Another personal example: if, since early adulthood, I have come to enjoy psychology and philosophy (the latter more like an active content creator), this is also due to my own characteristics, such as a cognitive profile more inclined toward linguistic abilities and a heightened self-awareness that induces a high frequency of reflective thoughts, even with unflattering aspects, such as a greater narcissistic tendency. For I observe that there was no antecedent in the environment I lived in as a child that would have led me to like geography and dislike math. And even in cases where it exists or existed, a factor external to the individual does not have the power to profoundly change him without a prior basis within himself or his biology that could make this change possible. In these cases, therefore, it would be more of a coincidence or even a factor that merely reinforced or served as an influential stimulus for the emergence of a preexisting potential, returning to my defense of biological determinism, in which no pattern or change in behavior, or development, that we exhibit, occurs without a predisposition or prior basis. It may sound redundant and disappointing, but that is what I intend to say, i have noticed on this topic, primarily by myself.