  We develop an approach to choice principles and their contrapositive
bar-induction principles as extensionality schemes connecting an "intensional"
or "effective" view of respectively ill-and well-foundedness properties to an
"extensional" or "ideal" view of these properties. After classifying and
analysing the relations between different intensional definitions of
ill-foundedness and well-foundedness, we introduce, for a domain $A$, a
codomain $B$ and a "filter" $T$ on finite approximations of functions from $A$
to $B$, a generalised form GDC$_{A,B,T}$ of the axiom of dependent choice and
dually a generalised bar induction principle GBI$_{A,B,T}$ such that:
GDC$_{A,B,T}$ intuitionistically captures the strength of$\bullet$ the general
axiom of choice expressed as $\forall a\exists\beta R(a, b)
\Rightarrow\exists\alpha\forall a R(\alpha,(a \alpha (a)))$ when $T$ is a
filter that derives point-wise from a relation $R$ on $A x B$ without
introducing further constraints,$\bullet$ the Boolean Prime Filter Theorem /
Ultrafilter Theorem if $B$ is the two-element set $\mathbb{B}$ (for a
constructive definition of prime filter),$\bullet$ the axiom of dependent
choice if $A = \mathbb{N}$,$\bullet$ Weak K{\"o}nig's Lemma if $A = \mathbb{N}$
and $B = \mathbb{B}$ (up to weak classical reasoning): GBI$_{A,B,T}$
intuitionistically captures the strength of$\bullet$ G{\"o}del's completeness
theorem in the form validity implies provability for entailment relations if $B
= \mathbb{B}$,$\bullet$ bar induction when $A = \mathbb{N}$,$\bullet$ the Weak
Fan Theorem when $A = \mathbb{N}$ and $B = \mathbb{B}$.Contrastingly, even
though GDC$_{A,B,T}$ and GBI$_{A,B,T}$ smoothly capture several variants of
choice and bar induction, some instances are inconsistent, e.g. when $A$ is
$\mathbb{B}^\mathbb{N}$ and $B$ is $\mathbb{N}$.
