12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

回覆文章
Kooper
YOYO member
文章: 2725
註冊時間: 週三 4月 11, 2007 11:40 pm

12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Kooper »

Dear all, this Saturday is supposed not to have yoyo meeting but I offer to hold an informal one for those who need one in this holiday season.
Here you go with the topic. You can either watch the TED talk or read the article quoted partially below. For your information, I personally prefer the speech to the article. Enjoy! :drink:

The Right Way to Make a Hard Choice

(1)TED talk https://www.ted.com/talks/ruth_chang_ho ... =tedspread

(2) Article http://jezebel.com/the-right-way-to-mak ... 1677819333 .

The bigger the choice, the more importance we attribute to it. We assume that every choice—every time we have to weigh facts and feelings in an attempt to arrive at the Right Thing to Do—contains a right outcome and a wrong outcome. But what if big choices don't have to be harder than small ones? And what if there is no such thing as an objectively correct Right Thing to Do in most of these cases anyway?

That is the essence of a recent NYT op-ed by Ruth Chang, a philosophy prof at Rutgers who studies and teaches about the value of choice. In it, she argues that hard choices are hard not—as we tend to assume—because there are so many important aspects to consider. Hard choices are often hard because the options have similar value. Not the same value, but similar value, or what Chang calls "on a par."

Take Eve, a hypothetical chooser Chang uses to illustrate a point:

Eve works as a textbook editor at a Boston publishing house and was approached by a small but prestigious imprint on the West Coast that was looking for a fiction editor. The job would be a big promotion, with a significant raise, and Eve had always wanted to work in fiction. But Eve is in crisis. Should she move her husband and young daughter from their cozy life in Boston, her home of 15 years, to the wilds of California? If she stays, will she be forsaking the opportunity of a lifetime? If she moves, will her new boss turn out to be a jerk? Will her child be bullied at school? What if her husband can't find a good job? Will the family quarrel, the marriage dissolve, her boss fire her for being incompetent, and she and her child end up on food stamps in a homeless shelter?

Here, Eve is trying to identify the objectively better choice, the with a higher value. But she should be putting her energy into trying to figure out what type of person she is, or wants to be. There are objective benefits and drawbacks to Boston and California, to be sure. But as no one can predict a decision's trickle-down effect, but what makes one option better or worse for Eve hinges on whether she is better suited to staying put or setting up new stakes, to playing it safe, or adventuring. In other words, is Eve the sort of person who could move to California and make a go of it, understanding all that risk?

All too often, we treat big choices as a matter of computation, Chang says, when they're not:

But choosing between jobs is not like computing the distance between Memphis and Mumbai. The view of choice as a matter of calculating maximal value is assumed in cost-benefit analysis, government policy making and much of economic theory. It's even embedded in the apps you can download that purport to help you decide whether to buy a new car, get married or change jobs.

At the heart of this model is a simple assumption: that what you should choose is always determined by facts in the world about which option has more value — facts that, if only you were smart enough to discover, would make decision-making relatively easy. But when it comes to these big choices, value is a totally different beast, Chang asserts. Value is often determined internally rather than externally. And the good news about big decisions where the options are on a par is that you can't really pick incorrectly:

If your alternatives are on a par, you can't make a mistake of reason in choosing one instead of the other. Since one isn't better than the other, you can't choose wrongly. But nor are they equally good. When alternatives are on a par, when the world doesn't determine a single right thing to do, that doesn't mean that value writ large has been exhausted. Instead of looking outward to find the value that determines what you should do, you can look inward to what you can stand behind, commit to, resolve to throw yourself behind. By committing to an option, you can confer value on it. This is great news if you're one of those people who is always looking for signs: "the sign" is you choosing! By choosing, you create value, and the action makes you, as Chang puts it, an author of your own life. For Eve, that could mean:

Eve might resolve to make her life in Boston. Someone else, in her shoes, might resolve to start a new life in California. There is no error here, only different resolutions that create different sorts of people. That is an incredibly liberating idea, no? There is no error here. Only different resolutions. In essence, the choice is the "right" choice because you made it.

Questions for Discussion
1. What's the speaker's definition of hard and easy choices? Are hard choices always big according to the lady? Could you give examples of small but tough choices? Did you experience hard choices that doesn't fit her definition? What is your own definition of tough decisions?

2. The philosopher mentioned several myths in making hard choices. What are they and how did she reason to debunk these myths? Do you buy her reasoning?

3. What advice did the speaker make when it comes to making hard choices? According to her, what option do people usually choose in tough decisions?
Do you agree with her theory and suggestion?

4. Have you made or seen any hard choices that follow the philosopher's prescription? Did those decisions make you become the kind of person you were pursuing, as the philosopher suggested?

5. There are many decision making theories raised by management experts in private sector and academia. Even TED has multiple speeches on decision making (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... rd+choices). A simple google search also brings us countless advice on how to make tough decisions. Please pick one of the theories and share with us.

6. Please select one and explain meanings of the following expressions and make some sentences using them.
- If something leaves somebody cold (0:35)
- If a decision is momentous (0:46)
- If you wring your hands (0:50)
- If you gnash your teeth (0:50)
- Occasions when you uproot, uproot your family, or uproot your life (1:32)
- How does the speaker describe the idea in English that 兩個選擇整體來看並沒有任何一個勝出?
- An intractable choice, problem is...? (2:05)
- We unwittingly assume that ... (7:36)
- A is akin to B (7:36)
- If the alternatives are on a par (9:26)
- to enslave somebody (10:33)

Start Time: 4:00
End Time: 6:30
Kooper
YOYO member
文章: 2725
註冊時間: 週三 4月 11, 2007 11:40 pm

Re: 12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Kooper »

This lady's approach is looking for a robust solution that accommodate to the most of the possible futures. For instance, instead of predicting whether Trump or Clinton would get elected, a better approach is to come out with a plan that are going to work no matter who will become America's next president.
頭像
Rock
YOYO member
文章: 2162
註冊時間: 週三 10月 31, 2007 9:03 am

Re: 12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Rock »

For marathonists only.

In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.
Kooper
YOYO member
文章: 2725
註冊時間: 週三 4月 11, 2007 11:40 pm

Re: 12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Kooper »

This article points out limitation of Ruth Chang's theory where people are taken out alternative choices. Quoted as below.

http://ideas.ted.com/what-happens-when- ... de-for-us/
"“Hard choices are precious opportunities to celebrate the human condition,” says philosopher Ruth Chang. It’s through hard choices that we become the unique people that we are.

It’s an interesting proposal, but it’s one that raises a big question for me: what about people who don’t have the opportunity to make hard choices? Faced with the threat of violence, or unhealthy environments, or overreaching governmental or corporate power, many people do not live in truly free conditions. For them, life is shaped by decisions made by other people — and they have little agency to change these structures.

.....

Perhaps these three scenarios lie beyond the limits of practical reason that Chang outlines in her talk. The individuals in these cases are not choosing between two available options; they’re living out the consequences of a decision made for them by someone else.

Which raises the question: If hard choices offer us a special opportunity to create our character, personality and identity, then doesn’t the denial of choice foster dehumanization?"
頭像
Laura
YOYO member
文章: 351
註冊時間: 週二 12月 16, 2003 10:28 am

Re: 12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Laura »

How a terrific topic! :)

I have got the cold, fever.
Sorry, I couldn't join. :oops:
The best teacher is child,
the worst mistake for one is to abandon oneself,
the greatest treasure in the world is love!
Kooper
YOYO member
文章: 2725
註冊時間: 週三 4月 11, 2007 11:40 pm

Re: 12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Kooper »

Rock 寫:For marathonists only.

Hi Rock, this is very encouraging. Did you play this to your students? :o
Kooper
YOYO member
文章: 2725
註冊時間: 週三 4月 11, 2007 11:40 pm

Re: 12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Kooper »

Laura 寫:How a terrific topic! :)

I have got the cold, fever.
Sorry, I couldn't join. :oops:
Hi Laura, thanks for informing me in advance. Take care!
頭像
Rock
YOYO member
文章: 2162
註冊時間: 週三 10月 31, 2007 9:03 am

Re: 12/31(Sat) How to Make Hard Choices (Kooper)

文章 Rock »

For marathonists only. Not for the kids; not even for us (unless you're a marathonist). 8)
回覆文章