Rabbit holes

[Empty_of_Clouds]

We live in an age where there are a multitude of fountain pens available, with more and more new models produced each year, to say nothing of the smorgasbord of (mostly working) older pens, some dating from the fin de siècle, that are also there for the sampling. On top of this, look at inks. From a time when there were few colours - mainly black or brown - through the cautious introduction of blue, red and green, to the current firework display of endless variation.

In other words, there is a lot of choice. A real lot.


The other day I caught a recording of George Carlin, and in it he said "Too many choices America, it's not healthy". He was talking about something else, but it struck a chord.

Well, leaving out the "America" part I wondered if there was any kind of debate on this, and it turns out that there has been tons. Far too much to mention here. A short internet search led me to a book by psychologist Barry Schwartz - The Paradox of Choice, Why more is less. This in turn led to another website all about voluntary simplicity, and from there a winding path through history to the likes of Diogenes and so on. Hence the rabbit hole in the title.

It would seem, from a cursory reading, that having too many choices reduces our happiness in significant ways. And yet, here we are in a culture of rampant consumerism.

So, I am a bit baffled. Is our assessment such that the supposed happiness assigned to acquisition outweighs the apparently well-known happiness that accrues with living more simply?



Note, for the most part I would exclude collection that is done with the spirit of preservation of historical (past and present) artifacts from this question.

[Chuck Naill]

IMHO, the issue is not the number choice, but a lack of satisfaction in the choices we may. If choice are random vs strategic, it might be more difficult later to ask yourself why you acquired a particular pen. I recently read that is it wrong to think of emotion and reason opposed to each other because it can be the emotion that drives the reasoning.

In other words, if I can acquiring something because I've convinced myself that I must have this or that, later I might feel silly of letting something like a FP cause so much concern. Whereas, if our acquisition is based on a strategy of only going after an example of a pen design in the color that suits our preference, later we can reconstruct our decision.

I do not equate simplicity with having fewer choices or that having less is necessarily more happiness producing. A couple of authors once used the concept that happiness is a choice.

George Carlin would not be my source for wisdom. After all, he took advantage of a variety of substances to cope with his life choices. He seemed unhappy and vulgar. And, he chose a "7 dirty" words to construct his craft. Perhaps this is why he felt too many choices was not good....LOL!! In that context, I have to agree.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Things that trigger thoughts can come from any source. The source is irrelevant in many cases, as it is here with Carlin. However, that is why I mentioned the Barry Schwartz book. The guy is a psychologist, so it is reasonable to accept that he may know what he is talking about.

From his book:

"Autonomy and Freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have more choice than any group of people ever has before, and thus, presumably, more freedom and autonomy, we don't seem to be benefiting from it psychologically."

— quoted from Ch.5, The Paradox of Choice, 2004


After a little further reading I find that there is still much debate in the field about choice and happiness.

Anyway, I found it interesting enough to punt it here for discussion.

[Chuck Naill]

Things that trigger thoughts can come from any source. The source is irrelevant in many cases, as it is here with Carlin. However, that is why I mentioned the Barry Schwartz book. The guy is a psychologist, so it is reasonable to accept that he may know what he is talking about.

From his book:

"Autonomy and Freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have more choice than any group of people ever has before, and thus, presumably, more freedom and autonomy, we don't seem to be benefiting from it psychologically."

— quoted from Ch.5, The Paradox of Choice, 2004


After a little further reading I find that there is still much debate in the field about choice and happiness.

Anyway, I found it interesting enough to punt it here for discussion.

For me, his conclusion is that "we don't seem to be benefitting from it psychologically" is a good example of gross generalization. In fact, he is close to confirmation bias.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Things that trigger thoughts can come from any source. The source is irrelevant in many cases, as it is here with Carlin. However, that is why I mentioned the Barry Schwartz book. The guy is a psychologist, so it is reasonable to accept that he may know what he is talking about.

From his book:

"Autonomy and Freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have more choice than any group of people ever has before, and thus, presumably, more freedom and autonomy, we don't seem to be benefiting from it psychologically."

— quoted from Ch.5, The Paradox of Choice, 2004


After a little further reading I find that there is still much debate in the field about choice and happiness.

Anyway, I found it interesting enough to punt it here for discussion.

For me, his conclusion is that "we don't seem to be benefitting from it psychologically" is a good example of gross generalization. In fact, he is close to confirmation bias.

The thing is, Chuck, that he is not making a conclusion. He is offering an opinion based on observation, experience, and learned skill. The picture is likely more nuanced than presented here, but for the moment I tend to agree with his basic idea. It's kind of like the Buridan's Ass paradox.

[TSherbs]

Throw in the idea of the illusion of choice and the whole thing gets murkier.

The mile-long cereal aisle for me is just more noise and waste to wade through.

The amount of time spent in the process of making choices in a day may not be any happier (whatever that means) than time not spent in the tension of choice making. Ask an anxious person.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[catbert]

Throw in the idea of the illusion of choice and the whole thing gets murkier.

The mile-long cereal aisle for me is just more noise and waste to wade through.

The amount of time spent in the process of making choices in a day may not be any happier (whatever that means) than time not spent in the tension of choice making. Ask an anxious person.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

Throw in the illusion of scarcity — arbitrarily limited editions, products going away (until they come back), etc. — and attendant FOMO to muddy things further.

[guyy]

Is there really so much choice? I can fly various airlines and have an equally miserable experience. Cotton socks that fit me and aren’t ugly? There are none! At the polls, i can choose between Tweedledee & Tweedeledum.

[SIR]

Smartwool socks - longest lasting by a very long way, and all-round most comfortable socks I have ever used.

[kazoolaw]

Random responses:
1. Who decides how many is too many.
2. For every person who is troubled by difficulty choosing ther are a dozen born shoppers.
3. Is there a problem with too many choices of studies and psychologists that prove both sides of any issue?
4. Why do we think that acquiring an object will provide happiness? Is "happiness" our goal in life?

[kaliuzhkin]

Soviet Union communism provided an alternative in consumer choice. Was that any better?

[carlos.q]

Consumer "choice" and planned obsolescence go hand in hand to artificially sustain the automobile industry.

Same thing happens with fashion.... The effect on our environment is horrendous.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

The original premise is not about whether our choices make us unhappy, but rather that being presented with too many choices leads to indecision and stress.

[catbert]

The original premise is not about whether our choices make us unhappy, but rather that being presented with too many choices leads to indecision and stress.

Yes, too much choice leads to indecision and stress. https://hbr.org/2006/06/more-isnt-always-better

But once a choice has been made, it tends to be rationalized as the best choice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias

So, consciously simplifying the burden of choice by limiting one's choices (living more simply, consuming less, etc.) should contribute to less indecision and stress, assuming one does not start second-guessing choices.

[Sandy]

The original premise is not about whether our choices make us unhappy, but rather that being presented with too many choices leads to indecision and stress.

The best way to avoid rabbit holes is to avoid the fields where the rabbits live.

The fountain pen hobby is no different from any other. I took up photography, before I went back to fountain pens and the hobby is not so different - but n Photogrphy the marketing was more relentless.

The media - whether it is the magazines or any other is paid for by advertising. So, many articles are commissioned to sell new kit. You can't be a serious photographer until you have X.... So, if you follow the media, readers are led on a perpetual path of purchasing new equipment in order to take better photographs.

I came across a book of Henri-Cartier Bresson photographs. He is regarded by many photographers as a master of photography. His photography is black & white. When looking at a book of his photos, I had an epiphany. Even with his limited equipment, Bresson is regarded as a master. No-one says he's rubbish because he didn't take photographs using the latest kit. At this, I stopped buying photography magazines, bought a couple of books about taking photographs and read them. After 12 years, I've learnt how to take better photographs using the "out of date" kit I have - and no-one is complaining.

Shakespeare wrote some of the greatest literature ever - and he didn't even have what we'd recognise as a pen. Homer did the same, and he couldn't even write because he was blind.

I think it is very easy to get drawn into a cycle of accumulation in any hobby. The media drives new sales - that's their business. New products, that people buy, drive the businesses forward. Montblanc is still selling the MB146 and 149 - designs from the 40's and 50's. Compare that to the typewriter business. It's nearly impossible to buy a new typewriter, stencils and all the other kit that went with it because no-one buys them in sufficient numbers anymore. Getting an MB repaired is still possible. Getting a Linton typewriter repaired is very difficult.


I think the question any hobbyist has to ask themselves is - What will this new piece of kit allow me to do, that I can't do now.

With pens, we'd got different nib sizes, as well as Italic. flexible and Oblique nibs. Pretty pens can also inspire people to do more writing - but there's only so many pens one can use in a day.


I find myself gravitating towards the same 5 or 6 pens all the time - which means I've got at least twenty pens that do not have much "value" in my collection - but I see myself as a writer rather than as a collector.

Of course, it would be much easier if someone had said, "The only pen you need as a writer is a MB146 (or whatever)" I probably would have skipped half the purchases I had made. But wisdom comes from making mistakes.

[kaliuzhkin]

The original premise is not about whether our choices make us unhappy, but rather that being presented with too many choices leads to indecision and stress.

The best way to avoid rabbit holes is to avoid the fields where the rabbits live.

The fountain pen hobby is no different from any other. I took up photography, before I went back to fountain pens and the hobby is not so different - but n Photogrphy the marketing was more relentless.

The media - whether it is the magazines or any other is paid for by advertising. So, many articles are commissioned to sell new kit. You can't be a serious photographer until you have X.... So, if you follow the media, readers are led on a perpetual path of purchasing new equipment in order to take better photographs.

I came across a book of Henri-Cartier Bresson photographs. He is regarded by many photographers as a master of photography. His photography is black & white. When looking at a book of his photos, I had an epiphany. Even with his limited equipment, Bresson is regarded as a master. No-one says he's rubbish because he didn't take photographs using the latest kit. At this, I stopped buying photography magazines, bought a couple of books about taking photographs and read them. After 12 years, I've learnt how to take better photographs using the "out of date" kit I have - and no-one is complaining.

Shakespeare wrote some of the greatest literature ever - and he didn't even have what we'd recognise as a pen. Homer did the same, and he couldn't even write because he was blind.

I think it is very easy to get drawn into a cycle of accumulation in any hobby. The media drives new sales - that's their business. New products, that people buy, drive the businesses forward. Montblanc is still selling the MB146 and 149 - designs from the 40's and 50's. Compare that to the typewriter business. It's nearly impossible to buy a new typewriter, stencils and all the other kit that went with it because no-one buys them in sufficient numbers anymore. Getting an MB repaired is still possible. Getting a Linton typewriter repaired is very difficult.


I think the question any hobbyist has to ask themselves is - What will this new piece of kit allow me to do, that I can't do now.

With pens, we'd got different nib sizes, as well as Italic. flexible and Oblique nibs. Pretty pens can also inspire people to do more writing - but there's only so many pens one can use in a day.


I find myself gravitating towards the same 5 or 6 pens all the time - which means I've got at least twenty pens that do not have much "value" in my collection - but I see myself as a writer rather than as a collector.

Of course, it would be much easier if someone had said, "The only pen you need as a writer is a MB146 (or whatever)" I probably would have skipped half the purchases I had made. But wisdom comes from making mistakes.

Bravo, Sandy

You're 100% right about photography media. I've been interested in photography since I was about 10, so that's 60 years. The hype, the encouragement to get certain equipment hasn't changed. I can say that in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's, certain magazines were nothing but advertisements. "To take better pictures, you need so-and--so equipment. I found one magazine: Camera 35, that stressed technique and ideas. They're no longer around, but there are still some magazines that emphasize ideas, not products.

[Ole Juul]

I do agree which much that is said here. But ... there is not much consumer choice these days, that's an illusion. The more industrialized we get the less choice there is. There is more choice with less industrial intervention. Take for example the choices when you're sewing a shirt for yourself. Even with the material at hand, how are you going to lay it out. Maybe there's a pattern, which gives a hundred decisions to make there in how you lay it out. Making your writing desk? Any piece of wood requires a lot of choices in how you relate to the grain, which side up etc. These choices effect design choices which are in the millions. There aren't that many choices to make when you go into a store and the only have 20 writing desks to choose from. Do they even have that many? Of course not, they have two pre-mades where all the decisions are made for you. And that's my point. In and industrialized society, most decisions are made for you.

I'll give an example using young children of how "consumer choice" works. The scene is you're trying to get your four year old dressed. You give them a sweater. "Put this on". Where upon you get a prompt "No!" OK, so you try a different tactic. "Would you like the blue sweater or would you like the red sweater?" That gives and illusion of choice, and you get an answer which is more agreeable to you. "The blue sweater!" Problem solved. Or, in consumer language: "SOLD!"

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Those are interesting examples, but they are also (in the most part) examples of things where there exists less choice.

So, let's give a counter example: I'm offering a pen user one specific pen, but they say they don't want that pen. So I give them all the options available, which results in having to make a choice between hundreds of models over dozens of brands from dozens of retailers (which can be subdivided into online, bricks and mortar and so on, which may influence their decision). Not to mention various offers that may exist, or the type of nib they want, whether it's available in the pen body they want, what kind of trimmings they expect, aftersales service variations, and on and on.

The point here is that, with respect to this hobby, we aren't being presented with just one or two simple options, a red pen or a blue pen (to borrow from your jumper example). The choice is huge and mulitfaceted. There is also the additional burden that occurs after you have selected a pen and decide to buy another of whether to get something similar or different.

A lot of choices, and this in a relatively obscure hobby. God knows what indecisions abound in more popular pastimes.

[Ole Juul]

I think there's a difference in perspective possible when we talk about choice. Perhaps I'm personally a little odd in that I don't like being told what to do. In other words if I'm looking for something and you show me a hundred "choices" that are not what I'm looking for, I just find that irritating. Why? Because I don't actually have a choice of things I want. Now another person who is used to being told what to do, as in they're easily influenced, would look at those 100 hundred items as choices, and not just as noise.

To clarify. I think "choice" can be seen as either being a selection of what you want, OR a selection of what someone wants to sell.

Frankly, I don't care what someone wants to sell. That's not my business or interest.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

I think there's a difference in perspective possible when we talk about choice. Perhaps I'm personally a little odd in that I don't like being told what to do. In other words if I'm looking for something and you show me a hundred "choices" that are not what I'm looking for, I just find that irritating. Why? Because I don't actually have a choice of things I want. Now another person who is used to being told what to do, as in they're easily influenced, would look at those 100 hundred items as choices, and not just as noise.

To clarify. I think "choice" can be seen as either being a selection of what you want, OR a selection of what someone wants to sell.

Frankly, I don't care what someone wants to sell. That's not my business or interest.

Understood. However, in the general retail world, the choice is the stock that someone is selling, and the only other options are similar items sold by different retailers. From your perspective then the consumer's only initial choice would be whether to select from what's on offer or not. Am I reading you correctly? I cannot imagine a situation where someone was selling only the things that I want, but am open to an real world example if it will help me understand it.