Apple is the most valuable company in the world precisely for this reason IMO. They turn ambiguity of resource into colorful series of glyph-choices that you poke.
I really really liked this post. Especially the four bits around
1. “An educational program that can give its participants the experience of a clear decision-making process might attract students even though it provides minimal long-term value. ”
2. Observing the neuroticism of inconsequential choices and realizing these dynamics infect everything.
3. “As choices expand, predictability often decreases, meaning that it becomes harder and harder to commit to anything.”
4. The constraints of two people’s preferences can actually be much more generative than one because of the paradox of choice.
Thank you for the positive feedback and taking the time to read!
One area where I’d differ with you slightly is when you describe inconsequential choices as “neurotic.” I want to be a little more precise here.
I think that the bad in-the-moment feeling of neuroticism comes not from bad choices, but from disorganized choices—a bad process for decision-making, rather than from bad decisions.
Hence, a person who has had conventionally “bad” life outcomes—broke, unmarried, transient housing—might feel wonderful if he’s, say, living in a cabin in the woods during the winter and hikes all spring, summer, and fall. Or if he’s a solitary monk. Or a military special ops soldier for whom the entirety of their life’s structure is dictated by their mission. My guess too is that some people who sink into long-term addiction do so because, although it destroys many other areas of their life, it makes things oh so very simple. What do I do today? Drink and sit around. When I’m drunk, I won’t even have the capacity to think about doing anything else. Simple.
And of course, a person who’s had conventionally “good” life outcomes—rich, married, and so on—might feel terrible if he’s constantly faced with ever-changing complex problems related to his work or his marriage, doesn’t have a well-structured lifestyle, or creates problems for himself with his wealth.
Bill Gates seems like a relatively happy rich person. His marriage seems to be very stable, and I understand that his work time is rigidly structured. These are just a couple observations, of course, but he seems to have found a way to keep things simple and pay other people to take care of as many details and logistical issues as possible.
The ideal to strive for is a life that is simple/structured, and also healthy/successful. But if you have to pick one, most people are going to choose the former over the latter. The timeless wisdom of every spiritual tradition on this planet is that people dramatically underrate how important simplicity and structure is for their well being. Providing it is their reason for being.
Apple is the most valuable company in the world precisely for this reason IMO. They turn ambiguity of resource into colorful series of glyph-choices that you poke.
I really really liked this post. Especially the four bits around
1. “An educational program that can give its participants the experience of a clear decision-making process might attract students even though it provides minimal long-term value. ”
2. Observing the neuroticism of inconsequential choices and realizing these dynamics infect everything.
3. “As choices expand, predictability often decreases, meaning that it becomes harder and harder to commit to anything.”
4. The constraints of two people’s preferences can actually be much more generative than one because of the paradox of choice.
Thank you for the positive feedback and taking the time to read!
One area where I’d differ with you slightly is when you describe inconsequential choices as “neurotic.” I want to be a little more precise here.
I think that the bad in-the-moment feeling of neuroticism comes not from bad choices, but from disorganized choices—a bad process for decision-making, rather than from bad decisions.
Hence, a person who has had conventionally “bad” life outcomes—broke, unmarried, transient housing—might feel wonderful if he’s, say, living in a cabin in the woods during the winter and hikes all spring, summer, and fall. Or if he’s a solitary monk. Or a military special ops soldier for whom the entirety of their life’s structure is dictated by their mission. My guess too is that some people who sink into long-term addiction do so because, although it destroys many other areas of their life, it makes things oh so very simple. What do I do today? Drink and sit around. When I’m drunk, I won’t even have the capacity to think about doing anything else. Simple.
And of course, a person who’s had conventionally “good” life outcomes—rich, married, and so on—might feel terrible if he’s constantly faced with ever-changing complex problems related to his work or his marriage, doesn’t have a well-structured lifestyle, or creates problems for himself with his wealth.
Bill Gates seems like a relatively happy rich person. His marriage seems to be very stable, and I understand that his work time is rigidly structured. These are just a couple observations, of course, but he seems to have found a way to keep things simple and pay other people to take care of as many details and logistical issues as possible.
The ideal to strive for is a life that is simple/structured, and also healthy/successful. But if you have to pick one, most people are going to choose the former over the latter. The timeless wisdom of every spiritual tradition on this planet is that people dramatically underrate how important simplicity and structure is for their well being. Providing it is their reason for being.