Are too many choices overwhelming?

To me, there is no such thing as "too many" choices. Am I interested in most of the choices? Definitely not! Am I glad that our economy allows us to have these choices? Definitely!

I would rather live in a world where there are too many choices, where most will be disregarded by an individual, than one where choices are limited. A myriad of choices indicates a thriving economy.

Ask anyone who has lived in a Communist regime where choices were severely limited. They would only be too happy for the "confusion" that we have here!

I doubt emigres from communist countries are better judges than we who have always consumed. What do they know of product differentiation. The fact is food manufacturers are deciding what we will eat. A few quality choices rather than twenty doubtful brands appeals to me.

Mapleleaf, that question is right to the core of the issue. I think most of us appreciate the fact that our economy has the freedom to provide us with so many choices, but we also need to well educated in making choices that differenciate between packaging and true quality.

Add to that gozmo's concern of hidden flaws or defects, especially in the food we eat and the education becomes vital, including legislation to make sure we know how our food was grown and what went into the final product. We know all the ingredients, but, with genetically grown food, organically grown food, etc, and the standards that must be followed for those labels to apply, it is impossible to make a choice without knowing all the details.

This subject is like peeling an onion--make mine organic, please.

as a former very small rancher/farmer that raised my own beef/pork/lamb/veggies i would guess that what i grew was 90% organic. i did use antibiotics against common ailments as well as traditional/folk treatments (a lump of coal fed to pigs cures worms) cost is a major factor. the last time i kept track of costs a butchered steer in the freezer cost me about $1.18 lb but a market steer brought $.89 at auction. when the consumer decides that quality overrides cost the small trational farmer/rancher may have a chance but the potential for that happening is rapidly disappearing as corporate farms/livestock has destroyed almost all family farms in the west. as long as the consumer will spend $3,000 for a big screen T.V. but seek the discount hamburger, well you get what you want and thats what you got.

Dys. How true. My uncle ranched in Colorado and didn't use growth hormone until he decided that he couldn't compete anymore.
O do think more people are buying organically grown meat and veggies, even at the much higher cost. Once you get used to them, especially the meat, in my opinion, it's almost impossible to go back. Plus, the thought of how livestock is penned and treated on the huge, corporate farms and ranches is sickening.
I love a good steak, lamb and veal, but find it hard to enjoy eating it when I think of how the animal lived it's short life.
There again, the marketing makes such a difference. Corporations have multi-millon dollar budgets for advertising. The small rancher doesn't advertise at all. Not many people realize what a difference there is in the quality of the food.

The problem is not simple a multitude of chocies for consumables. As McCraken and others have observed Americans use things to construct a persona (a self) In Transformations he discusses the results. We have a multitude of selves we can present to the world., each with ita own set of cultural rules, Preppie, Goth, Martha Stwart Suburban etc. A plentitute of things results in a plethoria of cultures or prehapse more properly subcultures. As the rules we behave by allow others to predict our behavior a plentitude of cultures creates a situation in which everyone is potentially a strange, operating by rules you may not know or understand, thus unease and in some case pranoia.

I believe I may be out-of-focus with the thread. I am thinking about life in general. As a retired educator, I have often wondered about activities/courses dealing with decision-making, beginning at the youngest age and progressing through our last years.

Effective decisions take into account our knowledge and understanding of ourselves, others, and of the world around us. The media, family and others constantly bombard us with the hard sell of what we should do. Meanwhile, our minds try to sort through our inner struggle of who am I and what do I need.

To me, choices can be limited by our ability to set aside essential ones from the ones more directly affecting our daily lives. Yet, I admit, limiting choices enhances the ability of the mind to separate need from want.

Acquiunk, I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.

It has been shown that when people dress nicely they tend to behave differently. This is why many schools have instituted a dress code. The rules are easier to understand and, I would imagine, easier to follow.

I enjoy dressing up but I also enjoy getting dirty, wet and muddy with my dog at the dog park. This causes no problem for me in knowing how to behave or what the rules are. Are you saying that in society there are so many differences that they cause confusion?

It is said that cleanliness is next to Godliness. Also it is said that we should dress for the occasion. What kind of impression do we want to create, what task are we undertaking. We should put ourselves in the mind of the beholder. When meeting a client before I retired then I would dress accordingly, casual but smart.
Going to the retail park then it's casual but scruffy. My criteria is comfort, in the physical and mental sence. It's not a difficult choice. So with me it's WYSIWYG.

In many ways I prefer the "Good old Days" When we had very little but didn't know it since everyone was in the proverbial 'same boat. It was a time when family still mattered and you lived in the same area as most of your relatives and life was much simpler. Material things were not as important as they are today. Note was born the year of the great depression.

Au, I find myself remembering nostalgically, yet here we are. We must learn to live and thrive in this world or it will pass us by.

One of the incredible about human beings is their ability to adapt. It hasn't always been successful, but they go on and keep trying.

The materialism and commercialism of today's society does concern me because it isn't very healthy. There such a huge emphasis on brand and competition for certain names that children have commited murder over a pair of sneakers.

The system of education hasn't kept up with the changes. There is little taught about morals---I'm certainly not advocating religion, just a discussion of what makes for a healthy society; studying why selflessness and altruism are good for everyone.

I am a capitalist but I have seen capitalism become something unrecognizable during my life; something that rewards dishonesty and one-upsmanship, with no respect for the workers at the lowest levels. Business has always been cutthroat, but concern for each worker could be found in many businesses. I guess that is why all the choices have begun to bother me, even though I love having them.

Americans surround themselves with things and use those things to advertise their wealth education political positions life goals cultural values etc. The classic example is the "hippie" but there are a multitude of others and McCraken groups these into four general categories Upward transformations, Beat transformations, Swift Transformations and Postmodern transformations. To summarize these four types briefly and poorly; Upward transformations are social climbers they use material things to advertise a social status that is higher than their origins. The problem is they are subject to "gate keepers". People who know the rules of the social class that is aspired to and judge the acceptability of the aperients. Martha Stewart is a good example of a gate keeper. Beat transformations are the reverse, they exemplify the rejection of social distinctions based on things and strive for simplicity and egalitarianism (hippies). Swift transformation are excessive consumers of excess. The classic example is the 50/60 suburbanite with a car covered with chrome and a lifestyle to match. The most interesting is the Post modern Transformations. The excess of material production linked with globalization allows individuals to create and occupy their own persona or adopted a "portfolio" of personas that the move between. To quote McCraken…

"It is possible we are witnessing the creation of a global self and an expansionary individualism. The global self is curious and catholic in searching out new definitional options, credulous in trying them on, mobile in its incorporation of diverse and improbable materials, adroit in its embrace of several at once, skillful in managing the portfolio of selves that is the result, and sturdy enough to live with the ideational and emotion turbulence that must ensue. Most of all, it is imperial. The global self is a presumptuous self, seeing itself as a master of its own fate, as the author of its own circumstances, as the rightful inventor of the self. It claims all experience as its province, all definitions of the self as its domain. The global self looks like the early modern Dutch, Spanish or English courts, taking on and using up anything in its reach". (McCraken, Transformations, Page 823-24)

This is the most disruptive in terms of social intercourse. For example… gender, I personal know of two women who in their course of their young adulthood (18-35) have gone from proclaimed bisexuals to a "committed" lesbian relationship, to conventional marriage and motherhood. One graduate of my high school class did this in reverse and all did this publicly without any sense of shame or alienation. They simply assumed or demanded that others would accept them as they were as of the moment. Gender is somewhat simplistic as there is a material (biological) standard against which to compare the individual. But in terms of the material presentation social personae "plentitude" provides a greatly expanded range of things out of which to construct one's own personal portfolios of selves that can be present sometimes at whim. For others this requires a heightened mental agility to determine what personae one is dealing with at the moment. Culture, which includes the rules by which we interact with and predict the actions of others has been fractured. The old rules do not apply but the new rules are not necessarily self evident. This is further confused by the fact that material things posses the property of indeterminacy. That is, they do not necessarily mean what they advertise. We can hide our true selves or motives by adopting the trappings of a personae we do not necessarily intend to fulfill. This extracts a psychological toll on people or as McCracken puts it requires people "to live with the ideational and emotion turbulence that must ensue". It is this which in my opinion that is the source of much of the unease and discontent in this country.

i hate to bust anyone's bubble but currently there is no evidence that homo sapiens are a viable species.

Insects, bacteria and viruses will indeed always have the upper hand in terms of survival....and evolution. They are way quicker to adapt, and do so right underneath our human radar....and they don't have to think about it, they just do it. Aww, imagine them all in teeny tiny Nikes...walking all over humankind...perhaps the question is, is self-awareness really a good thing for our survival as a species?

Acquiunk, please correct me if I'm wrong. Do you mean that, because most people can take on different personae, that action makes it more difficult for others to feel any sense of security in their presence? Is there a general unease in society because people don't remain the same in terms of their usual lifestyle?

If so, I strongly disagree with your statement. For so many people who have lived for years in unhappy circumstances, to finally make the break and start life anew with more confidence and a different outlook, I can only say, " good luck to you."

I understand how the hugely increased divorce rate has caused major upheavals that are very unhealthy in many cases. That is apparent in all of society. Yet I would encourage anyone to leave an abusive spouse. Maybe I'm way off base here and simply don't understand your statement.

Dys, true, we haven't been around long enough to be considered a viable species. Wonder how the dinosaurs did it?

Cavfancier, cockroaches are supposedly able to withstand a nuclear explosion; at least the radiation and nuclear winter that would result as an aftermath.

regarding divorce-been there done that- but i would say that in this era people are not dependent to remain in a marriage as they have in the past. the old "thru thick and thin" was all too often shackles of dispair and loneliness, abuse and sorrow, grief and pain sanctioned by the church and state. Life is too damn short and fragile to live it out in misery without simple joy. just my opinion, i could be wrong.

Dys, the older I get, the more I appreciate the sweetness of life and I agree wholeheartedly agree with you, with the caveat that when children are involved there can be devastating consequences.

BTW, I just read a hilarious story on PDiddie's thread: http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7234

You have to go to the article and keep reading and scrolling, but it is well worth it.

.

I wish

You look very natural with that little girl in your arms. Someday?