Paralysis

My thoughts on being paralyzed.

I agree with Schwartz when he says that too much choice paralyzes a consumer. However, I think he fails to distinguish this idea on a very important level. If I’m searching for a pair of jeans, but I very much care about my appearance and how I dress… I would be glad that I have so many choices. How would fashion designers feel if they go to their favorite clothing store, and only found one pair of cookie-cutter jeans? At the same time, if they’re unfamiliar or don’t care about technology or their computers, they would probably want limited choice to make the decision process easier. Choice facilitates individuality within our society and allows each person to choose to be different.

“Salad dressing – you made a good choice, but since there are others, you may feel regret even though the choice was good” – Again, I see his point, but I think it’s a moot point. So what if you feel regret about a choice you’ve made? You learn from your mistakes, and next time you choose a different salad dressing that will taste better.

I fundamentally disagree with his saying that “the key to happiness is low expectations”. I can see his point and how it would apply, but what if you apply that to something like technology? What if everybody was content with the first word processor? Technology wouldn’t have escalated like it has. You essentially limit your level of happiness. Let’s say that you are buying a pair of jeans in the 1960s… for the sake of ease, the jeans are all the same, just different sizes. When you buy that one pair, you may be satisfied with how it is because it is the only available one. So perhaps you are 100% satisfied with your purchase at the time. You like it, and you’re satisfied, but again… it’s the only option. Now fast forward 40 years later when you have all of the different styles of jeans that are different. You may have to search more for the pair that you like, but I believe you will come out with a higher level of satisfaction than what you experienced 40 years ago. You might be 1.5x more satisfied than you were when you bought those jeans 40 years ago, yet you’re still at 100% satisfaction. Your satisfaction ceiling has risen and now, you have an even deeper appreciation for jeans.

He keeps saying that people’s expectations go up with choice, and they are harder to satisfy. That’s how things improve, people improve, communities improve…. I guess I’m just trying to view this on a macroscopic level, thinking about the impacts that his principles would have on society. When I think about it on this level, his ideas don’t make any sense to me. Limiting choice simply prohibits progression since everybody is satisfied as a result of lowered expectations. I agree with his principles on an individual rational level… you’ll feel more easily satisfied when you have less choice because the choice is easier to make, and the marginal difference between Choice A and Choice B will be much higher than the difference between A and B when you have more and more choice. Yet, it’s hard for me to think of logical application since I can’t see a rational reason to follow this ideology.