On the a priori nature of values ​​and implications for the meaning of free choice

Hello Rabbi,
In the column "The Arbitrariness of Will in Leibowitz's Doctrine – Positivism and Pluralism", you wrote that the positivist accepts his values ​​as self-evident and does not question them, because he "knows" that they are true. However, if we accept this assumption, it follows that a person has no choice in what his values ​​are. The significance of that a priori nature of values ​​is enormous. In essence, a person is forced to act according to his values ​​(whatever they are), and in addition, any prioritization and refinement of values ​​will be determined by a priori considerations, since we have no way to rationalize values. We have no way to decide between values ​​other than the strong feeling that we know what is right to do. In essence, the entire process of making value decisions is a process that is forced upon us, and we as humans have no way to choose our values, since by definition it is impossible to give them an explanation. The entire process from beginning to end is a priori.
So, what is the meaning of free choice? After all, the outcome is forced upon me in terms of the values ​​that were imposed on me a priori. What is the meaning of choice when the way you "choose" is given to you a priori? Ultimately, every action taken is determined by some desires and values, and they are all a priori for us! It's like choosing according to someone else's set of values, a set of values, which not only cannot be determined by you, but you also cannot determine the scale of values, since everything is a priori, even the way in which we refine our values. This is equivalent to a sophisticated robot, which has a certain scale of values ​​and acts according to them.
I would be happy if the Rabbi could assist me in this important matter.
Thank you very much and good news.