I'm going to talk to you about some stuff that's in this book of mine that I hope will resonate with other things you've already heard, and I'll try to make some connections myself, in case you miss them.
Danas ću vam govoriti o nekim stvarima o kojima sam pisao u mojoj knjizi koje će vam, nadam se, potvrditi ono što ste čuli do sada. I tokom toga ću pokušati da povezujem neke detalje - za slučaj da ih promašite. Počeću sa nečim što ja zovem "zvanična dogma".
But I want to start with what I call the "official dogma." The official dogma of what? The official dogma of all Western industrial societies. And the official dogma runs like this: if we are interested in maximizing the welfare of our citizens, the way to do that is to maximize individual freedom. The reason for this is both that freedom is, in and of itself, good, valuable, worthwhile, essential to being human, and because if people have freedom, then each of us can act on our own to do the things that will maximize our welfare, and no one has to decide on our behalf. The way to maximize freedom is to maximize choice.
"Zvanična dogma" čega? Zvanična dogma svih zapadnjačkih zemalja. Suština tog verovanja je u sledećem: ako želimo da poboljšamo blagostanje naših državljana,♫ najbolji način da to postignemo je da savršeno poboljšamo ličnu slobodu. Razlog je da je sloboda sama po sebi dobra i vredna stvar i da je apsolutno potrebna čovečanstvu. I onda, ako čovek ima slobodu onda može da se ponaša kako želi i, kao rezultat može da poboljša lično blagostanje, jer jedino on lično zna šta mu najbolje odgovara. Dakle osnovni način da postignemo maksimalnu slobodu je da poboljšamo mogućnost izbora.
The more choice people have, the more freedom they have, and the more freedom they have, the more welfare they have. This, I think, is so deeply embedded in the water supply that it wouldn't occur to anyone to question it. And it's also deeply embedded in our lives. I'll give you some examples of what modern progress has made possible for us.
Što više čovek ima izbora, to više ima slobodu, i što više ima slobodu, to mu je bolje blagostanje. Mislim da je ovaj mentalitet toliko usađen u društvenom verovanju na zapadu da nikom ne bi palo na pamet da misli na drugi način. A isto je tako usađen i u naš način života. Evo jednog primera kako je moderan napredak pomogao društvu:
This is my supermarket. Not such a big one. I want to say just a word about salad dressing. A hundred seventy-five salad dressings in my supermarket, if you don't count the 10 extra-virgin olive oils and 12 balsamic vinegars you could buy to make a very large number of your own salad dressings, in the off-chance that none of the 175 the store has on offer suit you. So this is what the supermarket is like. And then you go to the consumer electronics store to set up a stereo system -- speakers, CD player, tape player, tuner, amplifier -- and in this one single consumer electronics store, there are that many stereo systems. We can construct six and a half million different stereo systems out of the components that are on offer in one store.
Ovo je moja lokalna samoposluga. Nije ni tako velika. Želeo bih da kažem nešto o prelivima za salatu. Prodaju 175 drugačijih preliva za salatu u ovoj samoposluzi i 10 vrsta najkvalitetnijih maslinovih ulja i 12 vrsta sirćeta tako da možeš napraviti ogromni broj varijanti preliva za salatu za slučaj da vam nijedan od tih 175 gotovih preliva ne odgovara. Tako je u modernoj samoposluzi. I onda ako hoćete da kupite muzički uređaj i odete u radnju za elektroniku -- naći ćete sve od zvučnika do plejera za CD-ove i kasete, stimera i pojačalo. Ovo je samo jedna radnja za elektroniku, a postoji puno varijacija za muzičke uređaje. Može čovek da sastavi šest i po' milliona drugačijih muzičkih uređaja od tih delova koji se prodaju u samo jednoj radnji.
You've got to admit that's a lot of choice. In other domains -- the world of communications. There was a time, when I was a boy, when you could get any kind of telephone service you wanted, as long as it came from Ma Bell. You rented your phone, you didn't buy it. One consequence of that, by the way, is that the phone never broke. And those days are gone. We now have an almost unlimited variety of phones, especially in the world of cell phones. These are cell phones of the future. My favorite is the middle one -- the MP3 player, nose hair trimmer, and crème brûlée torch. And if --
Morate priznati da postoji jako puno izbora za muzičke uređaje. U drugim oblastima -- komunikacije na primer. Kada sam ja bio dečak, čovek je mogao da dobije kakvu god telefonsku uslugu je želeo, jedino ako je dolazila od Ma Bell-a. Čovek je zakupio telefon - nije ga kupio. A kao rezultat te zakupnine, telefon je uvek radio kako treba. Takvog servisa više nema. Sada imamo skoro neograničenu varijantu telefona, a pogotovo što se tiče tržišta mobilnih telefona. Ovo su mobilni telefoni budućnosti. Moj omiljeni je onaj u sredini -- koji služi kao MP3 plejer, trimer za dlake u nosu i baklja za creme brulee. I za slučaj da ga niste videli u prodavnici do sada,
(Laughter)
if by some chance you haven't seen that in your store yet, you can rest assured that one day soon, you will. And what this does is it leads people to walk into their stores, asking this question. And do you know what the answer to this question now is? The answer is "no." It is not possible to buy a cell phone that doesn't do too much.
možete biti sigurni da ćete uskoro moći. I šta ovo postigne je da ljudi onda odu u prodavnicu sami sebi postavljavljajući to pitanje. A naravno ogdovor za to pitanje je "Ne". Čovek jednostavno ne može više da kupi običan mobilini telefon.
So, in other aspects of life that are much more significant than buying things, the same explosion of choice is true. Health care. It is no longer the case in the United States that you go to the doctor, and the doctor tells you what to do. Instead, you go to the doctor, and the doctor tells you, "Well, we could do A, or we could do B. A has these benefits and these risks. B has these benefits and these risks. What do you want to do?" And you say, "Doc, what should I do?" And the doc says, "A has these benefits and risks, and B has these benefits and risks. What do you want to do?" And you say, "If you were me, Doc, what would you do?" And the doc says, "But I'm not you." And the result is -- we call it "patient autonomy," which makes it sound like a good thing, but what it really is is a shifting of the burden and the responsibility for decision-making from somebody who knows something -- namely, the doctor -- to somebody who knows nothing and is almost certainly sick and thus, not in the best shape to be making decisions -- namely, the patient. There's enormous marketing of prescription drugs to people like you and me, which, if you think about it, makes no sense at all, since we can't buy them. Why do they market to us if we can't buy them? The answer is that they expect us to call our doctors the next morning and ask for our prescriptions to be changed.
Znači, u drugim oblastima života, koji su mnogo značajniji nego materijalna potrošnja, postoji slično polje izbora. Na primer u medicini -- više nije moguće u SAD da odete kod doktora i doktor vam kaže kako ćete se najbolje izlečiti. Umesto toga, odete kod doktora, i doktor vam kaže "pa mogli biste izabrati opciju A ili opciju B. A vam može pomoći ovako, ali ima ove rizike. B vam može pomoći onako, sa onim rizicima. Šta vi želite da uradite?" I onda vi kažete "Doktore šta vi mislite da bi bila najbolja opcija?" i doktor vam kaže "Pa opcija A vam može ovako pomoći sa ovim rizicima, i B vam može pomoći onako sa onim rizicima. Šta vi želite da uradite?" A vi kažete "doktore, da ste vi u mojoj poziciji šta bi ste odlučili?" i doktor vam kaže "Ali nisam u vašoj poziciji, jedino vi možete odlučiti sami za sebe." I rezultat toga je nešto što se zove "pacijentska autonomija", i to naravno zvuči kao dobra stvar. Ali ustvari samo promeni situaciju tako da odgovornost nije više sa osobom koja zna nešto - naime sa doktorom - nego je sa osobom koja ne zna toliko i boluje i dakle nije u najboljem stanju da napravi odluke - naime, pacijentom. Količina reklama za lekove na recept koji su usmereni za generalnu populaciju je ogromna. A to nema nekog smisla zato što ih ne možemo kupiti. Zašto je taj marketing usmeren za ljude koji ih ne mogu kupiti? Zato što čim čovek čuje reklamu najverovatnije će nazvati doktora i pitaće ga da mu promeni recept.
Something as dramatic as our identity has now become a matter of choice, as this slide is meant to indicate. We don't inherit an identity; we get to invent it. And we get to reinvent ourselves as often as we like. And that means that every day, when you wake up in the morning, you have to decide what kind of person you want to be. With respect to marriage and family: there was a time when the default assumption that almost everyone had is that you got married as soon as you could, and then you started having kids as soon as you could. The only real choice was who, not when, and not what you did after.
Čak i nešto kao čovekov identitet je sada stvar izbora, kao što možete videti ovde. Čovek više ne nasledi identitet, nego ga može izmisliti. Može da promeni sam sebe koliko god puta želi. Znači da svako jutro kada se čovek probudi, mora da izabere kakvu ličnost, kakav identitet, želi da ima. Što se tiče braka i porodice, nekad je postojalo vreme kada se predpostavljalo da se čovek venčao čim je mogao, i da je počeo da ima decu čim je mogao. Jedino je čovek izabrao s kim će se venčati, ne kada će se venčati i što se tiče dece - čovek ih je imao bez da misli previše.
Nowadays, everything is very much up for grabs. I teach wonderfully intelligent students, and I assign 20 percent less work than I used to. And it's not because they're less smart, and it's not because they're less diligent. It's because they are preoccupied, asking themselves, "Should I get married or not? Should I get married now? Should I get married later? Should I have kids first or a career first?" All of these are consuming questions. And they're going to answer these questions, whether or not it means not doing all the work I assign and not getting a good grade in my courses. And indeed they should. These are important questions to answer.
U današnje vreme sve je stvar izbora. Ja predajem vrlo inteligentnim studentima, i dam im 20 posto manje zadataka nego što sam pre davao. Naravno razlog nije zato što nisu inteligentni, i nije zato što su lenji. Nego je zato što su zaokupljeni pitanjima života: "Da li treba da se venčam? Kada bih trebao da se venčam - odmah ili za nekoliko godina? Kako da izaberem između dece i karijere?" Ta pitanja su dosta zbunjujuća, a studenti će naći odgovore za ta pitanja, čak i ako to znači da ne završe sav rad koji sam im zadao i takođe ako dobiju lošije ocene zato što nisu skoncentrisani. A naravno ta pitanja jesu bitna.
Work. We are blessed, as Carl was pointing out, with the technology that enables us to work every minute of every day from any place on the planet -- except the Randolph Hotel.
Današnja tehnologija - kao što je Karl rekao ranije - daje ljudima priliku da mogu da rade u koje god doba dana, i odakle god da su na svetu - osim hotela 'Randolph'.
(Laughter)
(Smejanje)
(Applause)
There is one corner, by the way, that I'm not going to tell anybody about, where the WiFi actually works. I'm not telling you about it, because I want to use it. So what this means, this incredible freedom of choice we have with respect to work, is that we have to make a decision, again and again and again, about whether we should or shouldn't be working. We can go to watch our kid play soccer, and we have our cell phone on one hip and our Blackberry on our other hip, and our laptop, presumably, on our laps. And even if they're all shut off, every minute that we're watching our kid mutilate a soccer game, we are also asking ourselves, "Should I answer this cell phone call? Should I respond to this email? Should I draft this letter?" And even if the answer to the question is "no," it's certainly going to make the experience of your kid's soccer game very different than it would've been.
Ustvari postoji jedan ćošak u hotelu, gde radi bežični internet - ali neću vam reći gde je taj ćošak zato što ja hoću da ga koristim bez gužve. Šta to ustvari znači, ova neverovatna sloboda izbora koju imamo u vezi posla, znači da moramo da napravimo odluku nekoliko puta uzastopce, o tome da li i kada bi trebali da radimo. Može čovek odlučiti da ode i da gleda njegovo dete na fudbalskom terenu, i da ponese mobilni telefon, Blackberry i laptop kompjuter sa sobom. Ali, čak ako su svi ti aparati isključeni, dok čovek gleda utakmicu, konstantno se pita, "Da ogdovorim na telefon? Da odgovorim na ovaj e-mejl? Da napišem ovo pismo?" Čak ako i strogo odgovori na ova pitanja sa "ne", samo to što ima izbor da radi umesto da gleda utakmicu znači da će mu iskustvo utakmice biti potpuno drugačije.
So everywhere we look, big things and small things, material things and lifestyle things, life is a matter of choice. And the world we used to live in looked like this.
U svakom smislu, i u nebitnim i u relativno važnijim situacijama, sve je stvar izbora. Pre nekoliko godina, svet je izgledao ovako.
[Well, actually, they are written in stone.] That is to say, there were some choices, but not everything was a matter of choice. The world we now live in looks like this.
Znači, bilo je izvesnog nivoa izbora, ali nije sve bilo stvar izbora. Trenutno, svet nam izgleda kao što smo već rekli.
[The Ten Commandments Do-It-Yourself Kit]
Sada je pitanje je da li je ovo dobra ili loša vest?
And the question is: Is this good news or bad news? And the answer is "yes."
Odgovor je 'da'.
(Laughter)
(Smejanje)
We all know what's good about it, so I'm going to talk about what's bad about it. All of this choice has two effects, two negative effects on people. One effect, paradoxically, is that it produces paralysis rather than liberation. With so many options to choose from, people find it very difficult to choose at all. I'll give you one very dramatic example of this, a study that was done of investments in voluntary retirement plans. A colleague of mine got access to investment records from Vanguard, the gigantic mutual fund company, of about a million employees and about 2,000 different workplaces. What she found is that for every 10 mutual funds the employer offered, rate of participation went down two percent. You offer 50 funds -- 10 percent fewer employees participate than if you only offer five. Why? Because with 50 funds to choose from, it's so damn hard to decide which fund to choose, that you'll just put it off till tomorrow, and then tomorrow and then tomorrow and tomorrow, and, of course, tomorrow never comes. Understand that not only does this mean that people are going to have to eat dog food when they retire because they don't have enough money put away, it also means that making the decision is so hard that they pass up significant matching money from the employer. By not participating, they are passing up as much as 5,000 dollars a year from the employer, who would happily match their contribution.
Svi znamo šta je dobro sa ovim novim izborima u životu, tako da ću se skoncentrisati na lošije strane ove, sadašnje, situacije. Sav ovaj izbor ima dva efekta, dva negativna efekta na ljude. Jedan efekat, paradoksalno, je da ljudi u suštini imaju više paralizovan, umesto slobodnog načina života. Sa toliko puno opcija, čoveku je teško da napravi bilo kakvu odluku. Daću vam jedan vrlo dramatičan primer ovoga, gde je istraživanje bilo urađeno na dobrovoljnim penzijskim fondovima. Moja koleginica je dobila pristup izveštaju financijskih ulaganja 'Vanguard'-a, ogromne kompanije koja se bavi sa penzijskim fondovima i koja ima otprilike milion radnika i oko dve hiljade kancelarija. Šta je ovo istraživanje pokazalo je da za svakih 10 uzajamnih fondova koje je poslodavac ponudio, stopa učešća je pala za dva odsto. Znači, ako ponude 50 fondova -- 10 odsto manje radnika učestvuje nego kada ponude pet fondova. Zašto? Zato što od 50 fondova, teško je odlučiti koji fond da odaberu, tako da odlože odluku do sutra, i onda sutra opet odlože do sutra, itd. itd. A naravno to konstantno odlaganje znači da im treba mnogo više vremena da odluče u koji fond će uložiti pare. Ovo takođe ne samo da znači da će ovi radnici morati jesti čak i kereću hranu kada odu u penziju zato što nemaju dovoljno ušteđenih para, nego znači da zato što je ta odluka uzela toliko vremena, oni će takođe da propuste značajan dodatak u fond koji posladavac nudi tokom vremena tokom kojeg su oni 'odlučivali'. Time što ne učestvuju oni propuste do 5.000 dolara godišnje od posladavca, koji bi rado <b>zadovoljio</b> njihov doprinos u fond.
So paralysis is a consequence of having too many choices. And I think it makes the world look like this.
Tako da je određena paraliza posledica previše izbora, i mislim da sav taj izbor znači da nam svet izgleda ovako.
[And lastly, for all eternity, French, bleu cheese or ranch?]
(Smejanje)
(Laughter)
You really want to get the decision right if it's for all eternity, right? You don't want to pick the wrong mutual fund or wrong salad dressing. So that's one effect. The second effect is that, even if we manage to overcome the paralysis and make a choice, we end up less satisfied with the result of the choice than we would be if we had fewer options to choose from. And there are several reasons for this. One of them is, with a lot of different salad dressings to choose from, if you buy one and it's not perfect -- and what salad dressing is? -- it's easy to imagine that you could've made a different choice that would've been better. And what happens is, this imagined alternative induces you to regret the decision you made, and this regret subtracts from the satisfaction you get out of the decision you made, even if it was a good decision. The more options there are, the easier it is to regret anything at all that is disappointing about the option that you chose.
Sigurno hoćete da napravite dobru odluku ako će ona biti za sva vremena, jel tako? Nećete da izaberete pogrešni fond, ili pogrešan preliv za salatu. Dakle to je jedan efekat. Drugi efekat je da čak i ako možemo da prevaziđemo tu paralizu i napravimo odluku,♪ nekako dođemo u situaciju da smo manje zadovoljni sa odlukom nego što bi bili da imamo manje opcija. Ima nekoliko razloga za ovo. Jedan razlog je da sa puno izbora za preliv za salatu, ako kupite jednu vrstu, i nije perfektan -- onda se počnete pitati koji preliv za salatu jeste idealan? Lako je zamisliti situaciju gde ste izabrali drugačiju vrstu koja bi bila bolja. Šta se desi je da vas ova zamišljena alternativa tera da zažalite zbog odluke koju ste napravili, i ovo žaljenje vam smanji zadovoljstvo koje ste dobili sa tom originalnom odlukom, pa čak i ako je to bila dobra odluka. Što ima više opcija to znači da je lakše da se zažali ista što je i malo razočaravajuće u toj opciji koju ste izabrali.
Second, what economists call "opportunity costs." Dan Gilbert made a big point this morning of talking about how much the way in which we value things depends on what we compare them to. Well, when there are lots of alternatives to consider, it's easy to imagine the attractive features of alternatives that you reject that make you less satisfied with the alternative that you've chosen. Here's an example.
A drugo je, kako bi rekli ekonomisti "propuštena dobit". Dan Gilbert je jutros istakao da koliko nam nešto vredi zavisi o tome sa čim možemo da uporedimo tu stvar. Tako da kada ima puno alternativa lako je zamisliti primamljive karakteristike tih alternativa koje odbijate, što vas čini manje zadovoljnim nego sa opcijom koju ste izabrali.
[I can't stop thinking about those other available parking spaces on W 85th Street]
Evo na primer. Ako niste iz Njujorka, izvinjavam se.
If you're not a New Yorker, I apologize. Here's what you're supposed to be thinking. Here's this couple on the Hamptons. Very expensive real estate. Gorgeous beach. Beautiful day. They have it all to themselves. What could be better? "Damn it," this guy is thinking, "It's August. Everybody in my Manhattan neighborhood is away. I could be parking right in front of my building." And he spends two weeks nagged by the idea that he is missing the opportunity, day after day, to have a great parking space.
(Smejanje) Ali ovo je što biste trebali da mislite. Evo romantični par u delu Njujorka koji se zove "Hemptons".© Vrlo skupe nekretnine. Divan dan. Nema gužve na plaži. Mogu da uživaju sami. Šta bi moglo biti bolje? Međutim: "Pa, dovraga," pomisli čovek, "Avgust je mesec. Sve moje komšije iz Manhattana su na letovanju. Mogao bih 'ladno da parkiram ispred moje zgrade." I tako provede naredne dve nedelje mučen tom mišlju da svaki dan propusta priliku da iskoristi odlično mesto za parkiranje.
(Laughter)
"Propuštena dobit"smanjuje zadovoljstvo odluke koju smo izabrali,
Opportunity costs subtract from the satisfaction that we get out of what we choose, even when what we choose is terrific. And the more options there are to consider, the more attractive features of these options are going to be reflected by us as opportunity costs.
čak i ako je to što smo izabrali odlično. I što više imamo opcija za izbor, i više nam izgledaju primamljive i bolje te opcije, to će biti veća 'patnja' za tom "propuštenom dobiti".
Here's another example.
Evo još jednog primera.
(Laughter)
Now, this cartoon makes a lot of points. It makes points about living in the moment as well, and probably about doing things slowly. But one point it makes is that whenever you're choosing one thing, you're choosing not to do other things, and those other things may have lots of attractive features, and it's going to make what you're doing less attractive.
Ovaj crtić ima dosta smisla. Ima smisla jer govori o tome da treba "živeti u trenutku", i verovatno o smanjenju brzine života. A potogovo ima smisla zato što govori o tome da kada čovek izabere da radi jednu stvar, u isto vreme izabere da ne radi druge stvari. Te druge stvari su možda jako primamljive, i to će vam dati osećaj da to što ste vi izabrali je manje primamljivo.♫ Treće je: povećanje očekivanja.
Third: escalation of expectations. This hit me when I went to replace my jeans. I wear jeans almost all the time. There was a time when jeans came in one flavor, and you bought them, and they fit like crap. They were incredibly uncomfortable, and if you wore them long enough and washed them enough times, they started to feel OK. I went to replace my jeans after years of wearing these old ones. I said, "I want a pair of jeans. Here's my size." And the shopkeeper said, "Do you want slim fit, easy fit, relaxed fit? You want button fly or zipper fly? You want stonewashed or acid-washed? Do you want them distressed? Do you want boot cut, tapered?" Blah, blah, blah on and on he went. My jaw dropped. And after I recovered, I said, "I want the kind that used to be the only kind."
Ovo mi je postalo jasno kada sam hteo da kupim nove farmerke. Skoro svaki dan nosim farmerke. Postojalo je nekad vreme kada su pravili samo jednu vrstu farmerki, i kupio si ih, i bile su jako neudobne, ali što si ih duže nosio i što više puta prao, one su počinjale da bivaju udobnije. Tako da sam nosio moje stare farmerke godinama pre nego što sam otišao da kupim nove, kada sam otišao u prodavnicu i rekao: "Hteo bih da kupim nove farmerke, evo moja veličina je..", a prodavac mi je rekao, "Da li hoćete zategnuti, opušten ili komotan kroj? Hoćete cibzar ili dugmad? Hoćete kameno-oprane ili kiselinom-oprane? Da li hoćete da izgledaju oštećene? Hoćete da možete da ih prevučete preko čizama, ili ukrojene, itd. itd..." Nije prestao sa pitanjima. Kada sam se oporavio od šoka rekao sam, "Hoću te vrste koje su pre bile jedine." (Smejanje)
(Laughter)
On nije imao pojma kakve su te bile,
He had no idea what that was.
(Laughter)
tako da sam proveo sat vremena isprobavajući sve te proklete farmerke,
So I spent an hour trying on all these damn jeans, and I walked out of the store -- truth -- with the best-fitting jeans I had ever had. I did better.
i kada sam završio isprobavanja -- mogu iskreno reći -- da sam izabrao najudobnije farmerke koje sam ikad nosio. Tako da mi je ishod bio bolji. Sav taj izbor mi je pružio priliku za bolje farmerke - i iskoristio sam priliku.
All this choice made it possible for me to do better. But -- I felt worse. Why? I wrote a whole book to try to explain this to myself. The reason is --
Ali osećao sam se lošije. Zašto? Napisao sam celu knjigu u pokušaju da objasnim ovo sebi. Razlog zašto sam se osećao lošije je,
(Laughter)
The reason I felt worse is that with all of these options available, my expectations about how good a pair of jeans should be went up. I had very low, no particular expectations when they only came in one flavor. When they came in 100 flavors, damn it, one of them should've been perfect. And what I got was good, but it wasn't perfect. And so I compared what I got to what I expected, and what I got was disappointing in comparison to what I expected. Adding options to people's lives can't help but increase the expectations people have about how good those options will be. And what that's going to produce is less satisfaction with results, even when they're good results.
sa svim ovim dostupnim opcijama, moja očekivanja o tome kako bi dobro trebale da farmerke budu su bila veća. Imao sam vrlo niska očekivanja. Nisam imao neka posebna očekivanja kada su bile samo jedne vrste. Ali kada ih je bilo 100 drugačijih, dovraga, jedna vrsta bi trebala da bude savršena. Kakve sam kupio su bile dobre, ali nisu bile savršene. Tako da sam uporedio to što sam dobio s tim što sam očekivao da dobijem, i to što sam dobio je bilo razočaravajuće kada sam uporedio s tim što sam očekivao. Kada čovek ima više izbora u životu, neizbežno je to da će imati veća očekivanja o tome koliko će biti dobre sve te opcije. Šta to znači je da će se čovek osećati manje zadovoljan s tim što izabere, čak i kada je ishod dobar.
[It all looks so great. I can't wait to be disappointed.]
Ljudi koji se bave marketingom ne znaju za ovo.
Nobody in the world of marketing knows this.
Zato što ako bi oni to znali, onda vi ne biste ovo znali.
Because if they did, you wouldn't all know what this was about. The truth is more like this.
Istina je više ovakva.©
[Everything was better back when everything was worse.]
(Smejanje)
The reason that everything was better back when everything was worse is that when everything was worse, it was actually possible for people to have experiences that were a pleasant surprise. Nowadays, the world we live in -- we affluent, industrialized citizens, with perfection the expectation -- the best you can ever hope for is that stuff is as good as you expect it to be. You will never be pleasantly surprised, because your expectations, my expectations, have gone through the roof. The secret to happiness -- this is what you all came for -- the secret to happiness is: low expectations.
Razlog zašto sve je bilo bolje kada je bilo gore je da kada je sve bilo gore, bilo je moguće da je čovek mogao da ima iskustvo koje je bilo prijatno iznenađenje. Sada, u današnjem svetu -- mi imućni, industrijalizovani građani, sa očekivanjem savršenstva -- jedino možemo da se nadamo da će ishodi biti toliko dobri koliko očekujemo da će biti. Nećete nikad biti prijatno iznenađeni zato što vaša očekivanja, i moja očekivanja, su značajno povećana. Tajna srece -- ovo je zašto ste došli -- tajna sreće je da imate niska očekivanja.
(Laughter)
(Smejanje)
[You'll do]
(Aplauz)
(Applause)
(Laughter)
I want to say -- just a little autobiographical moment -- that I actually am married to a wife, and she's really quite wonderful. I couldn't have done better. I didn't settle. But settling isn't always such a bad thing.
Hteo bih da kažem -- mali autobiografski trenutak -- da sam oženjen, i žena mi je baš divna. Nisam mogao bolju ženu naći. Nisam se samo opustio i oženio kogagod. Ali nije to uvek loša stvar kada se čovek opusti i samo odluči na najlakšu opciju.
Finally, one consequence of buying a bad-fitting pair of jeans when there is only one kind to buy is that when you are dissatisfied and you ask why, who's responsible, the answer is clear: the world is responsible. What could you do? When there are hundreds of different styles of jeans available and you buy one that is disappointing and you ask why, who's responsible, it is equally clear that the answer to the question is "you." You could have done better. With a hundred different kinds of jeans on display, there is no excuse for failure. And so when people make decisions, and even though the results of the decisions are good, they feel disappointed about them; they blame themselves.
Konačno, jedna posledica kupovine neodobnih farmerki je da kada samo postoji ta jedna vrsta farmerki onda kada je čovek nezadovoljan, i pita sebe 'zašto', 'ko je odgovoran', odgovor je očigledan. Svet je odgovoran. Koja je bila alternativa? Kada postoji stotina drugačijih vrsta farmerki, i kupite jedne koje su razočaravajuće, i pitate zašto, ko je odgovoran? Jasno da ste vi odgovorni. Mogli ste izabrati bolji par. Kada ima stotina drugačijih vrsta farmerki, nema izgovora za neuspeh. Tako da kada ljudi prave odluke, i kada te odluke pruže dobre ishode, osećaju se razočarani s tim odlukama, i osećaju se krivi zbog razočarenja.
Clinical depression has exploded in the industrial world in the last generation. I believe a significant -- not the only, but a significant -- contributor to this explosion of depression and also suicide, is that people have experiences that are disappointing because their standards are so high, and then when they have to explain these experiences to themselves, they think they're at fault. So the net result is that we do better in general, objectively, and we feel worse. So let me remind you: this is the official dogma, the one that we all take to be true, and it's all false. It is not true. There's no question that some choice is better than none. But it doesn't follow from that that more choice is better than some choice. There's some magical amount. I don't know what it is. I'm pretty confident that we have long since passed the point where options improve our welfare.
Klinična depresija je eksplodirala u industrijskim zemljama tokom poslednje generacije. Verujem da značajan -- ne jedini, ali značajan razlog zbog ove povećane depresije, i zbog samoubistava, je da ljudi ima iskustva koja su razočarajuća zato što su im očekivanja toliko velika. Kada onda sebi moraju da objasne ova iskustva, misle da su sami krivi zato što se loše osećaju. Tako da sve skupa ishod je objektivno bolji, generalno, a ljudi se osećaju lošije. Da vas podsetim. Ovo je zvanična dogma, ta koju svi smatramo da je tačna, ali je ustvari pogrešna. Nije tačna. Očigledno je da je izvesna količina izbora bolja nego nikakav izbor, ali ta logika ne ide dalje - da je bolje imati čak i više izbora od izvesne količine izbora. Postoji neka čarobna količina. Nisam siguran koja je. Ali dosta sam siguran da smo već odavno prošli tu količinu opcija koja nam poboljšava blagostanje.
Now, as a policy matter -- I'm almost done -- as a policy matter, the thing to think about is this: what enables all of this choice in industrial societies is material affluence. There are lots of places in the world, and we have heard about several of them, where their problem is not that they have too much choice. Their problem is they have too little. So the stuff I'm talking about is the peculiar problem of modern, affluent, Western societies. And what is so frustrating and infuriating is this: Steve Levitt talked to you yesterday about how these expensive and difficult-to-install child seats don't help. It's a waste of money. What I'm telling you is that these expensive, complicated choices -- it's not simply that they don't help. They actually hurt. They actually make us worse off.
Što se tiče putokaza za budućnost -- skoro sam završio -- što se tiče putokaza, moramo ovako da mislimo.♪ Šta omogućava sav ovaj izbor u industrijskim zemljama je materijalno bogatstvo. Na puno mesta na svetu, i čuli smo o nekoliko njih, problem nije da imaju previše izbora. Problem im je da nemaju dovoljno. Tako da ovo o čemu pričamo je naročit problem modernih, bogatih, zapadnjačkih zemalja. I šta je posebno frustrirajuće je sledeće: Steve Lewitt je govorio juće o tome kako ta skupa i kabasta dečija sedišta u kolima ne rade. Da je to bacanje para. Šta ja želim da vam kažem je da kod takvih skupih, komplikovanih opcija - nije da one samo ne funkcionišu i ne pomažu. One čak i nanose štetu.® One nam u suštini čine više lošeg nego dobrog.
If some of what enables people in our societies to make all of the choices we make were shifted to societies in which people have too few options, not only would those people's lives be improved, but ours would be improved also. This is what economists call a "Pareto-improving move." Income redistribution will make everyone better off, not just poor people, because of how all this excess choice plagues us. So to conclude.
Kada bi samo deo toga što u bogatim zemljama dozvoljava ljudima mnogo izbora bilo preneseno u zemlje gde ljudi imaju malo izbora ne samo da bi život tih ljudi bio poboljšan, nego bi i naši životi bili bolji. To je ono što ekonomisti zovu Pareto Princip Raspodela bogatstva bi svima bila korisna zato što sav taj izbor nikome od nas koji ga imamo nije dobar. Znači, da zaključim: Treba da pročitate ovaj crtić:
[You can be anything you want to be -- no limits.] You're supposed to read this cartoon and, being a sophisticated person, say, "Ah! What does this fish know? Nothing is possible in this fishbowl." Impoverished imagination, a myopic view of the world -- that's the way I read it at first. The more I thought about it, however, the more I came to the view that this fish knows something. Because the truth of the matter is, if you shatter the fishbowl so that everything is possible, you don't have freedom. You have paralysis. If you shatter this fishbowl so that everything is possible, you decrease satisfaction. You increase paralysis, and you decrease satisfaction.
i recimo, podrazumevajući da ste inteligentna osoba, kažete: "Ah! Šta zna ta riba? Znate i sami da nista nije moguće u tom akvarijumu." Kakav siromašan pogled na svet! Ali, tako je kako i sam i ja sam shvatio taj crtić u početku. Međutim, što sam više o njemu mislio, sve sam više shvatao da ova riba zna nešto. Zato što je suština, istinski, u tome da ako razbiješ taj akvarijum, i sve postane moguće, tada nemaš slobodu. Imaš paralizu. Ako razbiješ akvarijum tako da sve postane moguće, u stvari smanjiš svoje zadovoljstvo. Povećaš paralizu i smanjiš zadovoljstvo.
Everybody needs a fishbowl. This one is almost certainly too limited -- perhaps even for the fish, certainly for us. But the absence of some metaphorical fishbowl is a recipe for misery and, I suspect, disaster.
Svakome treba jedan akvarijum. Ovaj ovde je sigurno previše skučen, čak možda i za ovu zlatnu ribicu, ali sigurno za nas. Ali nepostojanje ovakvog metaforičnog, zamišljenog akvarijuma, je recept za nezadovoljstvo i bedu, cak i totalnu nesrecu.
Thank you very much.
Hvala vam lepo.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)