Truth and lies versus good and evil

According to the Rabbi in column 177, I did not understand the statements of the Maimonides that imply that the famous things that were born in man after the sin damaged his intellect, mirrored his essence as he was before, and that this is not a matter that was born in man and not related to his intellect (from the Rabbi's words, it means that until the sin, man distinguished between truth and falsehood, and after the sin, he was added the ability to distinguish between what is beautiful and what is indecent - for example, revealing nakedness - and this is a disgrace to man). Is there a connection between the things?
For example: After the sin, he was "punished by the denial of that intellectual attainment" - his intellectual capacity was damaged. "And the famous attainments came to him and he immersed himself in defense and self-indulgence, and then he realized the extent of what he had lost" - what did man lose?

Anyone who believes that gravity is subjective is invited to go up on a roof and step over the railing, and while negating subjective gravity, continue walking in the air without falling.

This has nothing to do with my interpretation of the Rambam. That's what it says there, and therefore the question is directed to him and not to me. The Rambam claims that following the popular lowers the power of reason, because you cling to conventions instead of truth. The more we follow tendencies or conventions, the further we move away from reason and truth. He who is concerned with pleasing people, as with accumulating pleasures, moves away from truth.

The Rambam in the Book of Mormon, Part 2, Chapter 3, writes:
“But they also have a saying that is said in the Midrash in several places, and it is also in the Talmud, and it is that they said, ‘I am, and you will not hear anything from the mouth of the mighty one.’ Their meaning is that they came to them just as they came to Moses our Lord, and it was not Moses our Lord who brought them to them, and that these two elements, namely: the reality of God and His being one, are not attained except by human observation, and everything that is known by proof is subject to the prophet’s judgment in accordance with the judgment of all those who knew without distinction, and these two elements were not known from the side of prophecy alone, the Torah said, ‘You have shown knowledge,’ etc.
But the rest of the commandments are of the type that are famous and accepted, not of the type that are understood.”

Does the last line mean that honoring one's parents and not murdering are famous and uninformed, as the rabbi wrote in the column?

Another thing I wanted to understand is where free choice is in relation to sin? Did man sin because he had free choice? If so, I have a hard time understanding from the Rambam in the Laws of Repentance where he describes the uniqueness of man in his ability to choose between good and evil, not between truth and falsehood as described in the Book of Mormon about the image and essence of man.

“Every man is given the right, if he wanted to incline himself to a good path and be righteous, the right is in his hand, and if he wanted to incline himself to an evil path and be wicked, the right is in his hand. It is written in the Torah: Yes, man was like one of them to know good and evil, meaning that this kind of man was unique in the world and there is no other kind like him in this regard, that he would be of himself, in his mind and thought, knowing good and evil and doing whatever he desires, and no one would hinder him from doing good or evil”

It is possible. But the concepts of ‘famous’ and ’wise’ in the Rambam appear in several meanings (there was a column about this, and it was commented on in the talkbacks there).
A person chooses how to behave and weighs in his mind the truth and the lie. Choosing how to behave presupposes knowledge of good and evil, which is also accepted by reason.
According to the Rambam, a person is special both in his reason and in his ability to choose.