Dreaming of Tantalus
My sister was venting to me the other day about how hard her life is at the moment. Whether her life as a graduate student is actually difficult in an objective sense is highly suspect, but I wont go into that right now. She does truly believe her life is stressful and she is in tears every few days dealing with the gravity of her dissertation and various job offers. A person upset about job offers? Yes, it does seem odd.
Neo-classical economists would say that, theoretically, more choices should increase someone’s well-being. They believe that personal choice, free from any sort of “parentalism” (choices made by someone else for an individual’s supposed best interest), is most likely to make someone happiest. They believe that the individual knows one’s own preferences best and the individual can choose better than anyone else could since anyone else would know one less well. Offering more choice gives the individual more chance of finding what will fit him best and consumption should increase.
Empirically, though, the neo-classicalist position does not hold up because there are transaction costs in actually making a decision. Learning about options available takes time and actually committing to a decision can be stressful. Many people irrationally fear making a wrong decision or being cheated so much that they would rather not choose at all. Studies have shown that given too many choices and too much information, consumption actually decreases.
This seems to be the situation with my sister. She has an offer for a tenure track position at a university. I asked her if she wants to be a professor and she said, “I don’t know”. I asked her if she wanted to do government analysis work or work for an NGO and she said, “I don’t know”. I asked her what she wanted to do and she said, “I don’t know”. Any decision she makes may well affect her life for the next decade. They are all good options, but choosing one is apparently daunting for her.
Though she is unlikely to admit it, I believe my sister’s main problem is she does not know what she wants and, thus, she does not know how to achieve what will make her satisfied. There is definitely an advantage in knowing exactly what one wants. With a clear focus, one is more likely to be driven and one is more likely to achieve one’s goal. On the other hand, if one fails to achieve exactly what one wants (i.e. Tantalus), one may become quite depressed. Having no idea allows oneself to be open to several options.
Still, as economics and standardized tests show us, there are transaction costs to being indecisive. At some point, you have to fill in a bubble and move on.
Neo-classical economists would say that, theoretically, more choices should increase someone’s well-being. They believe that personal choice, free from any sort of “parentalism” (choices made by someone else for an individual’s supposed best interest), is most likely to make someone happiest. They believe that the individual knows one’s own preferences best and the individual can choose better than anyone else could since anyone else would know one less well. Offering more choice gives the individual more chance of finding what will fit him best and consumption should increase.
Empirically, though, the neo-classicalist position does not hold up because there are transaction costs in actually making a decision. Learning about options available takes time and actually committing to a decision can be stressful. Many people irrationally fear making a wrong decision or being cheated so much that they would rather not choose at all. Studies have shown that given too many choices and too much information, consumption actually decreases.
This seems to be the situation with my sister. She has an offer for a tenure track position at a university. I asked her if she wants to be a professor and she said, “I don’t know”. I asked her if she wanted to do government analysis work or work for an NGO and she said, “I don’t know”. I asked her what she wanted to do and she said, “I don’t know”. Any decision she makes may well affect her life for the next decade. They are all good options, but choosing one is apparently daunting for her.
Though she is unlikely to admit it, I believe my sister’s main problem is she does not know what she wants and, thus, she does not know how to achieve what will make her satisfied. There is definitely an advantage in knowing exactly what one wants. With a clear focus, one is more likely to be driven and one is more likely to achieve one’s goal. On the other hand, if one fails to achieve exactly what one wants (i.e. Tantalus), one may become quite depressed. Having no idea allows oneself to be open to several options.
Still, as economics and standardized tests show us, there are transaction costs to being indecisive. At some point, you have to fill in a bubble and move on.
posted by American Dilettante at
4:25 PM
2 Comments:
“Parentalism”? I think you mean "paternalism".
Now, I didn't go to a fancy-ass private school like you, but I'm pretty sure that "Tantalus" is not the relevant Greek Myth to reference in your story. He wasn't paralyzed by indecision. He didn't spend torturous months trying to pick the proper course of action. Clearly, Tantalus wasn't thinking AT ALL when he decided to betray the Gods (by sharing ambrosia with other mortals? or by feeling a dead human to the Gods?), and he was punished. That's just never a good decision, messing with the Gods.
So yes, he was then "tantalized" forever by having to stand up to his neck in water that would retreat when he bent to drink. And there was food above him, which would similarly shrink away at his grasp.
How is this like your successful sisters' predicament? I don't see it at all, dude. Damn, just about any other random name drop of a Greek Myth would have worked better - how about "Pandora's Box"? Yeah, she's tempted by a decision, but once she makes it, she's gotta live with the (potentially disastrous!) consequences. Much better.
Heck, even a reference to Metal Gods Pantera would have been more appropriate. Like, maybe talking about the decision to break up the band and how it triggered the anger of a crazed fan in Columbus. Or Pantene, the shampoo, could be worked into a metaphor somehow.
Tantalus? Damn.
By
mizerock, at 3:36 PM
No,
I meant "parentalism". It's an economics and policy term and is slightly different from "paternalism". With paternalism, an elitist group takes control of a lesser group. With parentalism, the lesser group chooses to be taken control of.
Tantalus is dreamt of because he knows exactly what he desires unlike my sister and many of us who do not. The down side of knowing exactly what one wants, though, is often being unable to achieve it unlike my sister and many of us that have many paths to fulfillment.
A lot of questioning today, Mizerock. You must have some trust in the Dilettante. :)
By
American Dilettante, at 4:06 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home