Yes that seems to be our ‘problem’.
Yes, this has been stated and affirmed ad nauseam. I’m merely saying that some people are better managers than others.
**Given the apparently widespread pattern of people reading Krishnamurti to form psychological opinions that “you” can’t do this, I’ll just say this, choiceless observation is effortless, it doesn’t require a “you” to simply look.
JK have talk about what is a true individual. He have refresh the word, give it another meaning then the one we have been conditioned to.
I suggest ( I must say I like the way you present your observations 
) that only a true individual can put an end to this dangerous spread of second-hand knowledge.
K.: It is very important to discover this, very important for each one of us to learn about it, to learn whether you are really an individual or merely the expression of conditioned thought, influenced through the centuries and therefore thinking in a particular way so that the individual has really ceased to be altogether. I hope you see the point.
K.: Obviously, to be an individual there must be freedom, total freedom which means an action which is not the reaction of a conditioning. I hope you follow this.
K.: So we have this problem of bringing about the true individual. Such an individual cannot be created except through self-knowledge, and you have to learn about the self. There cannot be any condemnation of what you find and there cannot be any identification with what you find, for any identification, justification, or condemnation is the result of accumulation, and therefore you cease to learn. Please do see the importance of this. It may sound very contradictory, but it is not. If you will observe you will see how necessary it is to learn, and to learn there must be a sense of complete humility, and there is no humility if there is condemnation of what you see in yourself. Similarly, if you see something good and identify yourself with that, then you cease to learn. So a mind that is capable of learning is the true individual mind, not the mind that has accumulated. At present we are all the time adding to our accumulations.
Krishnamurti in India 1958 (Verbatim Report) Poona, Madras, Bombay
Yes, but I was responding to your statement, “It’s a failure to choicelessly observe”. You might as well say that choicelessness is a failure to choose.
It seems quite simple - Krishnamurti points to the mountain saying it is a thing of great beauty and invites us to look. But we seem to find this extremely difficult to do without first indulging in endless analysis. I’m not criticising here, just stating what is observable and what we all do a lot of the time.
The simplicity is in the nature of insight, or the watchfulness where there is no movement of thought, what was called choiceless awareness. The complication, is in the way of thinking, and the way we play with thought. As you can see in the comments, there is no way out with thought, or rather thought is always a false way of understanding this thing called choiceless awareness. It is not that we can’t discover choiceless awareness, it is that thought contradicts.
Hello Sean - Yes, this appears to be the general tendency in the cultural conditioning we’re all programmed with growing up in a culture. The habitual pattern of analyzing according to the collected beliefs is the general nature of the conditioning. The system of thought has this “wrong turn” in it of making itself “all important” or “supreme.” As well as creating this psychological imagery of a ‘me and other’, which results in all of the beliefs being taken as “my beliefs.” And of course, “my beliefs” are “all important,” in the imagination. All of these thoughts are merely images and concepts. As K pointed out, there are clearly different human beings, but the psychological images in thought, in our heads, ‘referring’ to these beings, are not the person, they’re psychological imagery that’s commonly being confused for the beings. And the limited nature of these images is revealing itself in each thought that arises. As Korzybski pointed out, “A word is not the object it represents.” And all of this movement is available for observation, in relationship.