It seems like a completely simple word – “choice”. But how much is contained in it! Make a choice - what could be easier? You just need to choose - decide on some option. But why is making this most notorious choice so difficult? And - here's the paradox - the more options a person has, the more difficult it is to choose one thing.
For what reason, when faced with the need to choose, can a person refuse to choose anything at all or give this prerogative to someone else? What makes a person constantly put off making a decision?
And this applies not only to those cases when we are talking about something global, but also to seemingly completely trivial situations...
Psychology of choice
One of the famous American specialists in the field of existential psychology, Salvador Maddi, noted that whenever a person faces the need to choose, he must remember that in reality he has only two options - either to make a choice in favor of his past, or - in benefit of the future.
What is a choice in favor of the past?
A choice in favor of the past can be considered the choice that a person makes in the direction of what is familiar and familiar to him. When making such a choice, a person is guided by the principles of stability, being in a comfort zone, confidence in the future, because, in fact, there is no need to make any special efforts or change anything. In addition, there is a fear of the unknown, because... a person does not know what an unusual choice may entail in the future.
What is a choice in favor of the future?
By making a choice in favor of the future, a person automatically dooms himself to anxiety, because unpredictability and the unknown appear before him in all its glory, because It is impossible to predict the future, in other words: the future is a “dark horse” for a person. This is where worries and fears come from. But it is important to understand that personal growth and personal development are only possible in the future.
From all this the conclusion follows: whenever we have to choose something, we must choose either in favor of our innermost peace or in favor of the anxiety that torments us. And the first of these paths will lead us back, and the second will lead us forward.
But how to make a choice? How to understand whether it will be correct or not?
Why is this so?
The decision itself has a different sequence for male and female managers. The study, conducted at the DeGroote School of Business in Canada, surveyed 600 senior executives, including - as would be expected with the distribution of senior management - 75% men.
Photo by cottonbro: Pexels
At the time of the interview, many of them had already been in their position for many years, had a lot of routine work when it came to running the company, and had barely measurable experience in management matters.
Of course, they used this to inform their decisions: whenever a choice had to be made, men usually made decisions according to established rules and traditional processes that had proven themselves over the years of their careers.
However, the researchers found, especially among male managers, another common feature: many made decisions on their own. One might argue that, at the end of the day, all responsibility falls on the shoulders of the famous decision maker, so it would be understandable and consistent that he does not want to be influenced or even advised anything.
But this would be a more reasonable option. This is more often followed by women. They collect opinions, analyze, provide themselves with all possible information - and are less likely to make mistakes.
What makes it difficult for a person to choose?
Understanding the correctness of the choice is the whole “salt” of the question of choice. To put it a little differently, the indicator of the correctness of a choice is determined by its result, and this result can only be in the future, which has not yet arrived, because we live in the present.
Having come to understand this, people quite often make all sorts of attempts to somehow influence the outcome of their choice, waiting for the most suitable moment for it. But this is the reason, firstly, for procrastination, and secondly, for not making a choice at all. Agree, it’s impossible to make a decision tomorrow - all our excuses are like: “Later”, “A little later”, “Tomorrow”, etc. – this is just an illusion, and these moments themselves in most cases never come. Any decisions, any elections must be made right now. And this “now” is the starting point of the process of realizing our choice.
There is something else that makes it difficult for a person to choose - this is the price that he is willing to pay for it. This price represents the sacrifice he makes in order to realize his choice. If a person is not ready, or even worse, does not want to “pay”, this is pure readiness to become a victim. Why?
The victim, like anyone else, of course, has the ability to make decisions. But as soon as the need to pay the price arises, all sorts of complaints begin to come from him about how “terribly, badly, painfully, pitifully” he is, or he generally begins to look for “extreme” ones - those on whom to shift the responsibility. For this reason, when making a decision, you should always think about its consequences - about what you will have to give up. This is where you need to learn to ask yourself the right question: “Is it worth it?” Only by realizing the very value of the choice made does a person become able to change his life or leave everything as it was before.
But what is also important is the ability to take responsibility and understand that you are responsible for what happens to you and in your life - you are responsible for the consequences of this or that choice.
Willingness to make choices depends on gender
If a person is a man, it is quite natural that he will win only due to his superiority in decision making. Many people think so, but this is a mistake! Because there is a second, no less scientifically substantiated conclusion: women make better decisions.
This can be partially assessed by the speed of selection. Women take longer to commit, but they do so more carefully and often more faithfully.
They gather more information, look for advantages and disadvantages, and simply put more effort into making an informed decision. This inevitably increases the likelihood that a woman will hit the mark with her choices.
This is also visible at the management level of large companies. Although the top positions here are still dominated by men, many studies suggest that important decisions should be more likely to be placed in the hands of women - regardless of whether there is any quota for them.
Consequences of choice
The most pressing consequence of any choice is that choosing one thing means giving up something second, third, etc. If we open one “door”, we have to close the second. That is why the more alternatives a person has, the more difficult it is for him. In such situations, people utter the sacramental phrase that they are “torn to pieces.” Here the following intrapersonal conflict arises: “I need and want,” “I don’t need and don’t want,” “I need and don’t want,” “I don’t need and want.” And this conflict must certainly be resolved. A person can resolve it by resorting to several cunning methods.
How to make a choice?
In total, there are three ways to make a choice without harming yourself.
Method one: Try to make several elections at the same time. But here it is appropriate to recall the well-known proverb: “You can’t sit on two chairs.” But it is unlikely that you will be able to sit on two chairs. As a result, it turns out that the person never makes a choice, which means that he remains in the same place.
Method two: Leave yourself escape routes. The person seems to make a decision and do something, but every now and then he mentally returns to the starting point, thinking that perhaps it is worth choosing another option. The result of such a “choice” will be that all decisions and actions will be a movement “with a pitchfork through the water” or, as they say now: “About nothing,” because in order for the choice to have some effect and bring results, it is necessary to choose one option finally and irrevocably, completely forgetting about other/other options.
Method three: Go with the flow. Everything is simple here: a person takes absolutely no action, and hopes that the choice will be made by itself, without his direct participation. Another option is also possible: a person can wait until someone chooses for him in order to reconcile himself and protect himself from worries. However, this method is insidious: despite the fact that from time to time elections that occur by themselves can lead to quite favorable consequences, practice shows that in the overwhelming majority of cases everything happens with precision, but vice versa, i.e. not at all the way a person would like it to be.
And what follows from all this? How should you think and what should you be guided by when you need to make a choice?
Choice is not a search for the perfect solution
The situation of choice itself no longer presupposes any ideal solutions. When you have an ideal solution, the problem of choice makes no sense : you are simply actively walking along the carpet of life that you have already found/collected/received as a gift from the universe - whatever.
But if everything is generally good for you, you know where you are going, why and with whom - then what the hell is the choice? There is nothing to choose here. If you find yourself in a situation of choice, it means there is no longer any carpet. And therefore, to all questions like “how to marry someone your parents don’t like and not quarrel with them”, “how to change jobs so as not to suffer from adaptation, doubts and the need to gain authority”, “how to calculate all the risks, not having enough information, but in such a way that with a guarantee of success,” and, in the end, “how to change everything without changing anything,” the answer is one - nothing.
If you have a problem of choice, then this most likely means that it will no longer work out without conflicts, without suffering on one of the parties, without losses (even if you want to acquire something new and important, you will lose the old, and together with the advantages that this old thing still has), it won’t work without risk either.
Choice is generally quite painful, if anyone doesn’t understand.
But not making it is an even more painful choice. Because in this case, the choice will be made for you, and by this time you will be extremely exhausted from trying to sit on both chairs, you will break your ass, and evaluate this choice (and even the relative high from the responsibility removed from yourself for this choice) anyway. you can't.
And the search for an “ideal solution with a guarantee” can drag on for years. Or for life. And life, consisting of a chain of unmade choices, unmade decisions and refusals to control oneself, will ultimately be more like traveling in a cart, where the horse controls you, and you can only wonder why the cart shakes so much and you feel so sick...
Summary of the above
Yes, choosing is sometimes a difficult task. But the most serious and even severe consequences can result not from committing it, but from refusing it. And it often happens that it is this refusal that becomes the cause of mental anguish, feelings of guilt and disappointment, regrets and dissatisfaction, internal conflicts, loss of vitality and desire to do something, because an imperfect choice is, first of all, missed opportunities by a person. There are a lot of examples, but the main idea is that the past cannot be returned.
People can say that they do not regret anything, and everything is “God’s will”; that, despite everything, they continue to live and move on; that everything that happened is in the past, etc. But all this will resemble self-deception, unless the person has carried out a real transformation of his personality. In other situations, the experience of the days lived always and everywhere remains with him. The greatest stupidity that a person can do is his unwillingness to realize that once in the past he made the wrong choice - he made a mistake.
And taking into account everything that we have said, you can create a small algorithm for making the right choice. And it will look something like this:
- First, you need to answer the question for yourself: “Why am I making this or that choice?”
- Then decide what your new choice will be - past-oriented or future-oriented?
- Then clearly understand for yourself what price you are willing to pay for what you choose?
- The next stage will be to fully accept responsibility for the actions you take and the choices you make.
- And finally, make a choice and move forward without looking back - towards your future.
This is the only way you can not only learn to make predominantly correct choices in your life, but also follow a lifelong path without regret.
Life Course Options
According to the hypothesis of V.N. Druzhinin, “there are life options independent of the individual, which were invented by humanity and are reproduced throughout life. A person can choose one or another option depending on specific circumstances, but a life option can be imposed on him. The degree of human freedom and the degree of pressure on him from the outside world - the social environment - depend on specific historical conditions. The concept of “life option” is an integral psychological feature of individual existence and is determined by the nature of a person’s attitude towards life. The life option shapes the human personality and “types” it. A person becomes a representative of a “life type of personality.” So, a life option is understood as a qualitatively defined way of a person’s life. And thus, certain values and meanings of life are integrated with instrumental strategies for achieving them. In this interpretation, the term “life option” is synonymous with the established term “life scenario”. Life types are developed as independent options: “life begins tomorrow”, “life as creativity”, “life as an achievement”, “life is a dream”, “life according to the rules”, “life is a waste of time” and “life against life” . Despite the certain artistry of these names, there is a very definite psychological reality behind them.
“Life begins tomorrow” is a version of life in which a person is assigned the passive role of a dreamer and projector. A person who implements this option usually has many plans for the future and a good sense of time perspective, but it does not come to the practical implementation of his plans. A person continues to put off important things until tomorrow, endlessly delaying the fulfillment of life’s obligations. At some point, the preparatory stage of life’s journey turns out to be insufficiently extended in time, and there is almost no time left for real life. This is an eternal childish state. The end of a person who has lived such a life is sad: he is overcome by despair and anger at the wasted years.
“Life as creativity” is a variant of life in which a person is assigned the role of an experimenter conducting experiments on his destiny. The lifestyle of a creative person deviates from normative patterns of life and often looks like a rebellion against an established way of life. In fact, behind a person’s creativity and rebellion lies an internal rejection of the reality of life, a desire to avoid bitter disappointments in life. A person who chooses this lifestyle often lives a bohemian lifestyle and looks down on other people. The point of their work is to show the futility and worthlessness of trying to live an outwardly comfortable, respectable life. The main focus is on transforming the inner life and purifying the soul.
“Life as an achievement” is a version of life in which a person acts as a “man of action”, as a “self-made man.” The main psychological feature of this option of life is the devaluation of the present and the “fetishization” of the future. A person sacrifices the present for the sake of the future, which looms on the horizon. Life time is seen as a resource for achieving the maximum number of goals that promise a better life. The most striking examples of this type of life are provided by Western civilization, which educates its members in the spirit of the cult of achievements. Careerists, pragmatists and workaholics are the most typical in this regard.
“Life is a dream” is a version of life, the central feature of which is a person’s withdrawal from the reality of life into the illusory world of experiences. A person who cultivates this type of life leads a contemplative, passive lifestyle. V. N. Druzhinin describes this state as a kind of “psychological suspended animation.” Often this lifestyle is accompanied by the use of drugs and other psychotropic substances, with the help of which the effect of derealization is achieved. This is a feeling of the unreality of “external” life and at the same time the reality of the only desired “inner” life. This version of life is very popular in Eastern cultures and religions that profess the principle of non-interference in the natural course of life, for example, in Zen Buddhism.
“Life by the rules” is a life option characterized by high normative regulation of human life. In every culture and in every society there is a set of rules that prescribe the socially desirable order of a person's life path. Those who fall outside the normative pattern of life are punished and, in some cases, rewarded. According to V.N. Druzhinin, living by the rules is convenient, because it saves a person from difficult choices: after all, everything has already been planned for him and before him. This type of life is typical for societies with a totalitarian or authoritarian regime, with a repressive system of norms and rules of social interaction.
“Life is a waste of time” is a version of life in which the main occupation of a person is empty and aimless pastime. This option appeals to many people because of its homeostatic nature.
It means not trying to achieve life goals, not trying to overcome circumstances, and not worrying about how things are going. The lion's share of life is occupied by time-consuming activities.
This lifestyle option is often observed among the population of highly developed countries, which belongs to the “middle class”. Time when money is not being earned is usually wasted.
“Life against life” is a version of life where the main driving force is the struggle for survival. A person who chooses this type of life for himself is on the “warpath” against everyone. This is not war in the usual sense of the word, but as a result of the life of such a person there are always victims and sufferers.
This may be a more disguised form of struggle for social benefits, such as competition and fierce rivalry.
This type of life in its extreme forms is common in militarized societies or societies with low levels of economic development.
