We are very much conscious that what we freely desire is that which "feels good," that which in our mind will result in satisfaction, justice, success, prosperity, health, happiness, etc.
and
Both ["feels good" and "right"]are subjective perceptions of "good," or "desirable," or "necessary," or "beneficial," or "just," etc.
I disagree, and in my experience realizing what is the "right" thing to do is sometimes most definitely not a good feeling - and does not "feel good."
Your experience may be different, but if you are putting doing what's just, right, and justice, necessary, even desirable under the same definition as "feels good" then you've defined away my differences in this argument.
Definitions here don't change the choice or the ability to choose, so I have the same argument while disagreeing with your definition of what feels good.
We can, but going against the grain doesn't feel so good. :)
That's it. And some will choose not to go against the grain, some will choose to go against it (for something they value more) and not feel so good.
It is not the means by which we achieve the result but the results that motivate us. The means may be quite unpleasant, but unless there is a shiny beacon of "feels good" as a reward, the "light at the end of the the tunnel" for our suffering and pain, there would be no point in going though suffering and pain.