In an age of burgeoning consumerism, fueled by the increasing speed of technology, we are often inundated with an over abundance of choices.
You can now order a laptop computer online, choosing from a myriad of options, and have it delivered in about 48 hours directly to your house.
You can choose your blue jeans with at least 5 different "fits" in a variety of colors, with a variety of finishing techniques.
Most of the time we want our jeans to look lived in before we actually live in them.
If you order a chicken sandwich at a restaurant you can choose the level of spiciness, the type of bread, the type of side dish, and the type of condiment you want with your side dish.
It kind of makes your head spin.
In The Paradox of Choice, Barry Schwartz hypothesizes that this increasing amount of choice, which is designed to empower us, is actually making us all unhappier.
The book begins with, what has now become the central premise of many books, a litany of statistics which show that even though we earn more money in real terms, and have an easier life through the use of technology, we are by and large no happier, and in many instances less happy, than people in the 1950's.
As the consumer products industry has liberated us from the kitchen and the laundry room, it appears that the increasing number of choices we need to make to suffer this liberation is actually making us unhappy.
There is a long section of the book which defines "maximizers" and "satisficers.
" Essentially maximizers are people who, when they make choices, always have to choose what they perceive to be the best product or service.
Satisficers are people who, given limited time, choose things that are at least adequate for the task.
They may end up choosing the best product by default, but they are in no way going to spend a lot of time worrying about it.
The research shows, both economic and psychological, that satisficing is always the better option.
Maximizers tend to have more incidents of depression, mostly triggered by regret.
They never really know whether they have the best of the best because there are so many choices.
The satisficers, through a bit of indifference, suffer little regret and seem to enjoy more the free time they have by not comparison shopping so much.
The heart of the book, and the most important addition to the argument about choice being a sometimes bad thing, can be found in the chapters about regret.
We as humans often worry about if we made the right choice after the decision has been made.
This apparently becomes especially true when we have the option of opting out of our choices at a later date.
When we are allowed to change our minds, the confusion over choice then lingers over our heads for days and maybe weeks making the process even more confusing, and regrettable.
The studies show that people who treat decisions as final and irreversible are often much happier with their choices than people who have the ability to change their minds.
After all, once you drive the new car out of the dealership it's all yours.
You better love the car.
Even if you decide later that you really would rather have a blue one than a red one, it is amazing how good fire engine red looks on a car after you have it for a couple of weeks.
The author offers some solutions to the choice versus happiness conundrum.
The most empowering suggestion is of course to try always to be a satisficer and not a maximizer.
Be happy with making a good choice.
Do not worry about making the best choice.
In addition, once a decision is made, just assume that it is final and irreversible.
Do not let the confusion over choice linger long after the decision has been made.
He also suggests that establishing rules, before you choose, will make the process easier and less regrettable.
At its basest decide which mayonnaise, mustard, and ketchup you are going to buy before you head out to the store.
At its core this is really a lifestyle choice.
Living with fewer choices, means living a simpler life.