choices, for better or worse

http://blog.ted.com/2008/08/archive_barry_s.php

the argument proposed is that the belief that increased choice -> increased freedom -> increased welfare is false. the psycho already held the assumption that defines “choice” as the quantity of options available, but not everyone holds this assumption, and thus the psycho (and people in general) could not even begin to argue a topic without first clearly defining key terms.

later he has the opinion that making decisions is a “burden,” while others admire their capacity to do so. what does saying it’s a burden have anything to do with the main argument? his talk was very confusing, disorganized, incoherent, and filled with irreverent comments.

the psycho admits that while some choice is better than none, more choice is not better than some choice, because of the following two negative effects of increased choices:
1) difficultly in making a choice because the person is overwhelmed by many choices, or simply not making a choice at all
2) dissatisfaction with result of choice due to regret, opportunity cost, and increased expectation.

so these two effects decrease freedom? it isn’t clear. the rambling person opinionates that people blame themselves if they are dissatisfied with many choices, and blame the world when there’s few choices, but this all depends on the individual and culture, so to make statements as if they were absolute truth would be misleading if not blatantly lying.

he makes the claim that “the secret to happiness is low expectations,” which is laughable, since it’s nothing more than a wild assertion, but then again – he is trying to sell a book – after all.