What do you think?
Rate this book
Izbira
Facciamo un esempio, pensiamo a quanto spesso è difficile scegliere cosa mangiare in un ristorante cinese, per il semplice fatto che ci sono tantissime opzioni. Ci troveremo davanti a più il desiderio di fare la scelta ideale, il pensiero di come gli altri giudicheranno la scelta, quali tipi di scelte potrebbero fare gli altri, la sensazione che non vi sia nessuno al quale delegare la decisione, il timore di non poter fare una scelta veramente libera. Siamo incoraggiati da più parti a considerare la nostra vita come un insieme di scelte da dai prodotti sugli scaffali dei supermarket alle nostre carriere professionali, le nostre relazioni e i nostri corpi, tutta la nostra vera identità sembra esistere solo per poter scegliere. Abbiamo fatto propria l'impazienza del capitale. Prevale il desiderio continuo di profitti immediati. Non sono solo le aziende e la finanza che fanno pressione per gestire ogni rischio e massimizzare i profitti. Tutti noi siamo invitati a comportarci come le fare un piano per gli obiettivi della nostra vita, compiere investimenti a lungo termine, essere flessibili, ristrutturare l'impresa della nostra esistenza, e prendere i rischi necessari per incrementare gli utili. Ma paradossalmente questa apparente libertà di scegliere crea una maggiore ansia, un senso di inadeguatezza e colpa.
Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 2010
48 people are currently reading
1208 people want to read
About the author
Renata Salecl
31 books95 followersRenata Salecl, a philosopher and sociologist, is professor at the School of Law at Birkbeck College, University of London and senior researcher at the Institute of Criminology at the Faculty of Law in Ljubljana, Slovenia. Her books include The Tyranny of Choice and On Anxiety.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews
March 10, 2020
نیمه اول کتاب که به فرآیند ایدئولوژیک شدن مصرف در جوامع پساصنعتی و مثالها و تحلیل هایش می پردازد، نیمه جذاب تر و قابل تامل کتاب است. تعریف ایدئولوژیک شدن مصرف و تعمیمش به فضای تصمیم گیری های مدرن، استرس های ناشی از فرآیند انتخاب بی شمار و ارتباطش با الگوها و آرمانهای جامعه سرمایه داری و جهان بینی عمیقا فردگرایانه ای که ریشه مشکلات جدید برای بشر مدرن شده اند، از بحثهای قابل ذکر در این نیمه هستند
اما از اواسط کتاب فضای مباحث به سمت تحلیل های روانکاوانه کشیده می شود. قلم نویسنده در این بحثها کمی مرا یاد متنهای ژیژک می اندازد و با جستجویی ساده چندان هم تاثیرگذاری ژیژک بر نویسنده دور از ذهن به نظر نمیرسد. تا جایی هم که از نظریات فرویدی و لکانی در توصیف پدیده ها استفاده میکند، ایرادی به روش نویسنده نیست؛ اما در این شرایط با بازخوانی نظرات لکان و فروید در شرایط فعلی مواجه هستیم و نه تحلیلهای مختص به نویسنده. اتفاقا مشکل من با اثر از جایی شروع شد که با تحلیلهای روانکاوانه نویسنده مواجه شدم
پوپر علاقه داشت تا روانکاوی را روشی غیرعلمی بداند که قابل ابطال پذیری نیست. به نظرم خود این کتاب پوپری ها را شاد می کند. از طرفی تلاش می کند تا هر معضل را به سادگی به فروکاستن به رابطه سوژه با دیگری بزرگ حل و فصل کند (عدم ابطال پذیری) و از طرفی دیگر بعضی مسائل به سادگی با رویکردهای علمی و ریاضیاتی (برای نمونه تئوری بازی ها و مباحث اقتصاد رفتاری) قابل بحث و حل و فصل هستند، در حالیکه طفره نویسنده از پرداختن یا حتی نام بردن از چنین رویکردهایی قابل تامل است و حتی برای فردی که آشنا با جنبه های علمی تر قضیه است، برخی تحلیلها غیراساسی یا مضحک به نظر میرسند. مثالها هم کیفیت و کشش ذهنی لازم را از دست میدهند و نویسنده دست به دامن جادوگر شهر از و نگاه کردن خانم ها به دست و نظر یکدیگر برای خرید منزل میشود تا مثالهای خوبی بیابد. در کل این اثر برای من تائید دیگری بود که چندان ورود به مسائل روانکاوانه در تحلیل پدیده های اقتصادی و اجتماعی حوزه مطالعاتی مطبوعی برای من نیست و احتمالا روش بحث و ابرازهای تحلیلی این گروه هم در این اتفاق بی تاثیر نیستند
اما از اواسط کتاب فضای مباحث به سمت تحلیل های روانکاوانه کشیده می شود. قلم نویسنده در این بحثها کمی مرا یاد متنهای ژیژک می اندازد و با جستجویی ساده چندان هم تاثیرگذاری ژیژک بر نویسنده دور از ذهن به نظر نمیرسد. تا جایی هم که از نظریات فرویدی و لکانی در توصیف پدیده ها استفاده میکند، ایرادی به روش نویسنده نیست؛ اما در این شرایط با بازخوانی نظرات لکان و فروید در شرایط فعلی مواجه هستیم و نه تحلیلهای مختص به نویسنده. اتفاقا مشکل من با اثر از جایی شروع شد که با تحلیلهای روانکاوانه نویسنده مواجه شدم
پوپر علاقه داشت تا روانکاوی را روشی غیرعلمی بداند که قابل ابطال پذیری نیست. به نظرم خود این کتاب پوپری ها را شاد می کند. از طرفی تلاش می کند تا هر معضل را به سادگی به فروکاستن به رابطه سوژه با دیگری بزرگ حل و فصل کند (عدم ابطال پذیری) و از طرفی دیگر بعضی مسائل به سادگی با رویکردهای علمی و ریاضیاتی (برای نمونه تئوری بازی ها و مباحث اقتصاد رفتاری) قابل بحث و حل و فصل هستند، در حالیکه طفره نویسنده از پرداختن یا حتی نام بردن از چنین رویکردهایی قابل تامل است و حتی برای فردی که آشنا با جنبه های علمی تر قضیه است، برخی تحلیلها غیراساسی یا مضحک به نظر میرسند. مثالها هم کیفیت و کشش ذهنی لازم را از دست میدهند و نویسنده دست به دامن جادوگر شهر از و نگاه کردن خانم ها به دست و نظر یکدیگر برای خرید منزل میشود تا مثالهای خوبی بیابد. در کل این اثر برای من تائید دیگری بود که چندان ورود به مسائل روانکاوانه در تحلیل پدیده های اقتصادی و اجتماعی حوزه مطالعاتی مطبوعی برای من نیست و احتمالا روش بحث و ابرازهای تحلیلی این گروه هم در این اتفاق بی تاثیر نیستند
April 7, 2013
Before I go any further, despite the poor rating I think this is an important book that people should read – but as I’ll outline below it is flawed and problematic, and for that reason limited. That doesn’t stop me thinking that confronting and debunking this question of ‘choice’ is probably one of the major political issues of the time and I have great respect for Salecl’s attempt to confront and grapple with it: I really want to rate this as high on several scales – important, readable, accessible, flawed, disappointing, theoretically problematic.
The emergence of choice as the leitmotif of the contemporary age has been gradual, insidious and one of those ideological and hegemonic shifts that most of us miss until well after it has happened, although I’ll give it to economists on the left, and especially feminist economists such as Nancy Folbre, who were criticising the potency of the myth of Rational Economic Man in the mid-1980s, and the critics of Rational Choice Marxism, such as Ellen Meiksins Wood, whose critique of ‘choice’ took force about the same time.
For the rest of us, though, ‘choice’ as the defining characteristic of the age has crept into our lives, becoming normalised in the contemporary politics and culture of the time as the measure of a successful social and political system. We are offered choice in health care, education, chocolate bars, romance, when to start or stop having children, the type of fuel for our car, whether to plant trees to offset our air travel, where and when to exercise – and in all cases the existence of choice is a marker of systemic success.
The danger here is that when the existence of choice becomes the measure of success, it becomes, as Salecl notes in the timely but problematic book, a source of anxiety and tyrannical. Anxiety and tyranny go hand-in-hand, for the most part because of the fear of making incorrect choices, but there are also the constraints on choice – we may be ‘offered’ it but for social, cultural or more often economic reasons we may well be unable to exercise (that is, denied) that choice. A consequence of this may be making ‘choices’ that are undesirable, or by a particular value system wrong but necessary. What is more, we are then held responsible for the effects of our ‘choices’ as individual actions isolated from material, social or cultural constraint – so we see serious debates in the UK public health system about whether obese people should be refused care for obesity-related because they choose to eat badly, not exercise and so forth – their ill health is, by the logic of this system of choice, their fault. (I once wrote a paper arguing that under this tyrannical individualising culture of choice, physical inactivity was a logical and defensible choice – I did not say it was a good choice, but that it is rational; not surprisingly, it hasn’t been taken up by many – it is at http://glos.academia.edu/MalcolmMacLean).
So, I came to this book with high hopes only to be disappointed, but it has taken me some time to nail down why. On balance, there seem to be two problems. The first is related to the ideological power of ‘choice’ and the challenges of presenting that in a book targeted at a non-specialist audience. The ubiquity of this ‘normalised-as-a-public-good choice’ means that exposing its presence as a problem, identifying its cause and effects and suggesting solutions requires a set of sophisticated insights (which Salecl has) and poetic style, which Salecl also has, but in this case she has abandoned in favour of a more journalistic style that lacks the power to expose the richness of the trap that is choice. As a result, the book is more descriptive than analytically potent – and to her credit, Salecl does not attempt the what-to-do-about-it problem. So, the first problem then is one of voice/genre/idiom.
The second problem is theoretical. Salecl’s reliance on psychoanalysis is frustrating (but then I am often frustrated by the dominance of psychoanalysis, and especially Lacanian approaches, in contemporary social analysis). My problem is not with psychoanalysis as such, although it often becomes individualised, stultifying and a barrier to effective social change (this may be why Salecl avoids the what-to-do problem). In addition, the normalisation of psychologistic discourses means that, in a sense, Salecl is trying to use the master’s tools to demolish the master’s house: choice, as an individualised cultural practice becomes a matter of psychology. The upshot is that although her Lacanian analysis of ‘forced choice’ is convincing, her case for a failure to change is reduced to one of shame while also pointing to but downplaying the ideological effects of choice as concurrently offered and denied.
The point is not that the psychoanalytic approach is not wrong – it can be highly informative – but that it is not enough in and of itself. To her credit, Salecl concludes by highlighting the effects of small actions and unexpected (and perhaps unintended) consequences – she ends on Ryszard Kapuściński’s claim that the protests that eventually overthrew the Shah of Iran in 1978 started because a man refused a police demand that he stop, and she could just as easily ended on Mohammed Bouazizi’s self immolation as the moment when the ‘Arab Spring’ began or Mao Zedong’s observation that ‘the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step’, in reference to the Long March that led to the success of Chinese revolution. In each of these cases the issue is a set of social, cultural and political consequences of choice that psychoanalysis does not help us understand, because they are well beyond the individual.
This is not a self-help book, although I am sure some will try to read it that way, it is an attempt to explore a vital socio-political and cultural issue in an intelligent and sophisticated manner for non-specialist intelligent readers. The issues it grapples with are vital for us to understand the power of contemporary class and social power and how it buys our collusion in our own oppression. The range of examples Salecl calls into the discussion should give many readers a way into the issue, but overall the genre, idiom and theoretical approaches do not give the work the power it should have. Having said that, the mission was extremely difficult and I know I could not have done better (and in my previous foray into the field did nowhere near as well). It is worth reading and important for all its limitations.
The emergence of choice as the leitmotif of the contemporary age has been gradual, insidious and one of those ideological and hegemonic shifts that most of us miss until well after it has happened, although I’ll give it to economists on the left, and especially feminist economists such as Nancy Folbre, who were criticising the potency of the myth of Rational Economic Man in the mid-1980s, and the critics of Rational Choice Marxism, such as Ellen Meiksins Wood, whose critique of ‘choice’ took force about the same time.
For the rest of us, though, ‘choice’ as the defining characteristic of the age has crept into our lives, becoming normalised in the contemporary politics and culture of the time as the measure of a successful social and political system. We are offered choice in health care, education, chocolate bars, romance, when to start or stop having children, the type of fuel for our car, whether to plant trees to offset our air travel, where and when to exercise – and in all cases the existence of choice is a marker of systemic success.
The danger here is that when the existence of choice becomes the measure of success, it becomes, as Salecl notes in the timely but problematic book, a source of anxiety and tyrannical. Anxiety and tyranny go hand-in-hand, for the most part because of the fear of making incorrect choices, but there are also the constraints on choice – we may be ‘offered’ it but for social, cultural or more often economic reasons we may well be unable to exercise (that is, denied) that choice. A consequence of this may be making ‘choices’ that are undesirable, or by a particular value system wrong but necessary. What is more, we are then held responsible for the effects of our ‘choices’ as individual actions isolated from material, social or cultural constraint – so we see serious debates in the UK public health system about whether obese people should be refused care for obesity-related because they choose to eat badly, not exercise and so forth – their ill health is, by the logic of this system of choice, their fault. (I once wrote a paper arguing that under this tyrannical individualising culture of choice, physical inactivity was a logical and defensible choice – I did not say it was a good choice, but that it is rational; not surprisingly, it hasn’t been taken up by many – it is at http://glos.academia.edu/MalcolmMacLean).
So, I came to this book with high hopes only to be disappointed, but it has taken me some time to nail down why. On balance, there seem to be two problems. The first is related to the ideological power of ‘choice’ and the challenges of presenting that in a book targeted at a non-specialist audience. The ubiquity of this ‘normalised-as-a-public-good choice’ means that exposing its presence as a problem, identifying its cause and effects and suggesting solutions requires a set of sophisticated insights (which Salecl has) and poetic style, which Salecl also has, but in this case she has abandoned in favour of a more journalistic style that lacks the power to expose the richness of the trap that is choice. As a result, the book is more descriptive than analytically potent – and to her credit, Salecl does not attempt the what-to-do-about-it problem. So, the first problem then is one of voice/genre/idiom.
The second problem is theoretical. Salecl’s reliance on psychoanalysis is frustrating (but then I am often frustrated by the dominance of psychoanalysis, and especially Lacanian approaches, in contemporary social analysis). My problem is not with psychoanalysis as such, although it often becomes individualised, stultifying and a barrier to effective social change (this may be why Salecl avoids the what-to-do problem). In addition, the normalisation of psychologistic discourses means that, in a sense, Salecl is trying to use the master’s tools to demolish the master’s house: choice, as an individualised cultural practice becomes a matter of psychology. The upshot is that although her Lacanian analysis of ‘forced choice’ is convincing, her case for a failure to change is reduced to one of shame while also pointing to but downplaying the ideological effects of choice as concurrently offered and denied.
The point is not that the psychoanalytic approach is not wrong – it can be highly informative – but that it is not enough in and of itself. To her credit, Salecl concludes by highlighting the effects of small actions and unexpected (and perhaps unintended) consequences – she ends on Ryszard Kapuściński’s claim that the protests that eventually overthrew the Shah of Iran in 1978 started because a man refused a police demand that he stop, and she could just as easily ended on Mohammed Bouazizi’s self immolation as the moment when the ‘Arab Spring’ began or Mao Zedong’s observation that ‘the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step’, in reference to the Long March that led to the success of Chinese revolution. In each of these cases the issue is a set of social, cultural and political consequences of choice that psychoanalysis does not help us understand, because they are well beyond the individual.
This is not a self-help book, although I am sure some will try to read it that way, it is an attempt to explore a vital socio-political and cultural issue in an intelligent and sophisticated manner for non-specialist intelligent readers. The issues it grapples with are vital for us to understand the power of contemporary class and social power and how it buys our collusion in our own oppression. The range of examples Salecl calls into the discussion should give many readers a way into the issue, but overall the genre, idiom and theoretical approaches do not give the work the power it should have. Having said that, the mission was extremely difficult and I know I could not have done better (and in my previous foray into the field did nowhere near as well). It is worth reading and important for all its limitations.
March 23, 2022
Buen libro para hacer una introducción al tema de la elección en el capitalismo actual. Para quien ya viene leyendo sobre estas cuestiones no es del todo novedoso aunque los ejemplos son interesantes y están bien articulados. Por momentos el abordaje teórico es un poco liviano (sobre todo me sorprendió que sostuviera la noción de ideología como velo que, dados los desarrollos en la teoría de la ideología, quedó un poco antigua), por lo cual está bueno para trabajar en nivel medio o en un primer abordaje a las cuestiones que se tocan en el texto. Lo más interesante, en lo personal, fue lo referente a los discursos de autoayuda, que es el motivo por el que inicialmente me interesó encarar esta lectura. El ordenamiento de los capítulos es claro y coherente y, aunque - repito - no presenta una elaboración demasiado sorprendente o novedosa con respecto a su objeto, la lectura es amena y plantea preguntas y problemas importantes para entender la coyuntura actual.
Read
December 2, 2011"This book is a fascinating critique—so well-written and entertaining—of our contemporary culture of choice and the anxiety that surrounds these times. Salecl discusses the self-help industry that has burgeoned to help us deal with choosing, and all the ways in which we subvert choice in order to get it over with. Here is a delicious passage that opens the book at page 8: “Today’s advice culture presents the search for a spouse as not all that different from the search for a car: first we need to weigh up all the advantages and disadvantages, then we need to secure a prenuptial agreement, mend things if they go wrong and eventually trade in the old model for a new one, before getting tired of all the hassle of commitment and deciding to go for a temporary lease agreement.” Happy readings!" - Bernard Harcourt
September 4, 2012
Ab-so-lute-ly terrible. This is not a work of philosophy on any level - even an amateur should feel ashamed at producing such anecdotal tripe.
September 14, 2022
3.5 Stars!
“‘self-help’ increases the very sense of inadequacy and paranoia that it supposedly seeks to alleviate. It is a self-sustaining market. As far as wider societal goals are concerned, it is successful in creating, rather than dispelling, guilt and anxiety.”
It’s funny reading books like this, you start to get the impression that every other man above the age of 21 living in France must be a philosopher or psychoanalyst. Like in the work of Kristen Ghodsee, she touches on some of the tectonic shifts in outlook in nations during Communism and post-Communism, particularly in relation to choice.
“When choice is glorified as the ultimate tool by which people can shape their private lives, very little is left over for social critique.”
This is a clear and accessible book, comfortably mixing art with pop cultural references along with the work of various European philosophers, alive and dead. Salecl has produced a pleasing blend of knowledge and insight without disappearing up her own derriere.
Although I would like to have seen her go into a little more depth and explore some of her points more fully, I understand that wasn't the point of this book. But there was still plenty in here to make this good value, and Salecl is definitely a philosopher I will be reading more of.
“‘self-help’ increases the very sense of inadequacy and paranoia that it supposedly seeks to alleviate. It is a self-sustaining market. As far as wider societal goals are concerned, it is successful in creating, rather than dispelling, guilt and anxiety.”
It’s funny reading books like this, you start to get the impression that every other man above the age of 21 living in France must be a philosopher or psychoanalyst. Like in the work of Kristen Ghodsee, she touches on some of the tectonic shifts in outlook in nations during Communism and post-Communism, particularly in relation to choice.
“When choice is glorified as the ultimate tool by which people can shape their private lives, very little is left over for social critique.”
This is a clear and accessible book, comfortably mixing art with pop cultural references along with the work of various European philosophers, alive and dead. Salecl has produced a pleasing blend of knowledge and insight without disappearing up her own derriere.
Although I would like to have seen her go into a little more depth and explore some of her points more fully, I understand that wasn't the point of this book. But there was still plenty in here to make this good value, and Salecl is definitely a philosopher I will be reading more of.
March 28, 2018
Bu tarz kitapları okudukça aslında hiç bir kararı kendi basımıza alamadığımızı hep birilerinin veya birşeylerin etkisiyle o karara yöneldiğimizi çok açık ve net anlıyorum.
Seçenekler çoğaldıkça karar vermek icin kendimizi perisan ediyoruz. Karar vermenin zorluğunu ve sonrasındaki acısını hep başka birine yüklüyoruz.
Karar verirken genelde kazançlar yerine kaybetmenin riskinden kaçınıyoruz.
Kucuk bir yağmur ihtimaline karşın koca gün şemsiyeyi hiç kullanmayacak olsakta yanımızda taşıyoruz.
Bazı kısımlar zorlasada kitap gayet iyiydi.
Seçenekler çoğaldıkça karar vermek icin kendimizi perisan ediyoruz. Karar vermenin zorluğunu ve sonrasındaki acısını hep başka birine yüklüyoruz.
Karar verirken genelde kazançlar yerine kaybetmenin riskinden kaçınıyoruz.
Kucuk bir yağmur ihtimaline karşın koca gün şemsiyeyi hiç kullanmayacak olsakta yanımızda taşıyoruz.
Bazı kısımlar zorlasada kitap gayet iyiydi.
May 20, 2014
Końcówka ratowała książkę, ale wydanie jest fatalne. Tłumaczenie popełnia błędy, podobnie korekta: nowy akapit w środku zdania, "nie raz" kiedy powinno być "nieraz" ale za to brak spacji między "(nie)" i "przeżyć" w tytule książki Ehrenreich, arbitralność kursywy w terminach obcojęzycznych to tylko bardziej rzucające się w oczy problemy. Sama Salecl upraszcza i spłaszcza, przeskakuje z ciekawych rzezy na zbędne anegdotki, a w dodatku dokleja psychoanalizę mało zgrabnie (zasadniczo wiedziałam, że można się psychoanalizy tu spodziewać, to w końcu była żona Żiżka, ale wtedy, gdy coś ciekawego można by z psychoanalizy czerpać [np. melancholię], to psychoanalizy nie ma, a kiedy indziej mamy redukcję prawie każdej ludzkiej tendencji do symptomu i każdego człowieka do pacjenta na kozetce).
Ale krytyka minimalizmu jako legitymizującego konsumeryzm i stanowiącego gorzką drwinę z prawdziwej biedy - trafna. Szkoda, że nie poświęciła jej kilku stron więcej!
Zasadniczo problemy książki przynajmniej po części wynikają z jej wyjątkowo małej objętości. Niby 200+ stron, ale czcionka i rozstrzelenie spore - po prostu nie ma miejsca na rozbudowanie argumentów.
Ale krytyka minimalizmu jako legitymizującego konsumeryzm i stanowiącego gorzką drwinę z prawdziwej biedy - trafna. Szkoda, że nie poświęciła jej kilku stron więcej!
Zasadniczo problemy książki przynajmniej po części wynikają z jej wyjątkowo małej objętości. Niby 200+ stron, ale czcionka i rozstrzelenie spore - po prostu nie ma miejsca na rozbudowanie argumentów.
June 20, 2022
No soy especialista en el tema pero me gustó, con un lenguaje llano, ameno y con múltiples ejemplos te va planteando porqué la elección y la idea de construir nuestra propia vida como si de un catálogo se tratara es parte de los espejos de colores que ofrece el capitalismo.
Abunda en ejemplos, desde todos los flancos de porqué es así: la construcción del cuerpo, de las relaciones, del trabajo, todo. También interesante el concepto de elección como superación que te plantea la autoayuda, pero claro, supeditado a sus postulados: vos sos capaz de todo pero ayudate con este sahumerio, esta agenda de chakras y este libro que te indica el camino 😅. Sí me pareció que esa parte tiene gran extensión pero no avanza de la misma manera sobre los procesos mentales, sociales o culturales que reemplacen esa forma de pensamiento. Lo único que plantea en el final es lo necesario de aceptar que no toda elección es racional y que eso no la hace menos válida, es decir, no podemos manejar todo, todo el tiempo. Es una concepción tranquilizadora, no manejo todo, dejemos que suceda... Será ésta la idea final?, me suena liviana, qué se yo...
Abunda en ejemplos, desde todos los flancos de porqué es así: la construcción del cuerpo, de las relaciones, del trabajo, todo. También interesante el concepto de elección como superación que te plantea la autoayuda, pero claro, supeditado a sus postulados: vos sos capaz de todo pero ayudate con este sahumerio, esta agenda de chakras y este libro que te indica el camino 😅. Sí me pareció que esa parte tiene gran extensión pero no avanza de la misma manera sobre los procesos mentales, sociales o culturales que reemplacen esa forma de pensamiento. Lo único que plantea en el final es lo necesario de aceptar que no toda elección es racional y que eso no la hace menos válida, es decir, no podemos manejar todo, todo el tiempo. Es una concepción tranquilizadora, no manejo todo, dejemos que suceda... Será ésta la idea final?, me suena liviana, qué se yo...
May 28, 2018
This is an awesome book. I think this book has created my most inward and profound reflection out of the entire year.
It's pretty dense, but if you spend time with it, it will have you arm-chair-musing during breaks of reading.
It's a good one.
It's pretty dense, but if you spend time with it, it will have you arm-chair-musing during breaks of reading.
It's a good one.
October 10, 2024
Yazarın kaygı üzerine diğer kitabını da okumuştum. Ama bu kitaba bakış açışı beni daha çok etkiledi.
April 27, 2023
En un momento crucial en mi vida para tomar una decisión, Renata me recuerda todos los factores que influencian mis decisiones y me invita a elegir sólo cuando yo quiera, a recordar que la mejor elección es la que se toma y a pensar un poco más en comunidad y menos individualista.
March 11, 2020
Kurzfassung
Das Buch geht der Frage nach, welche Auswirkungen die freie Eintscheidungswahl auf den Menschen hat und ob es sie überhaupt gibt. Leider nimmt die Psychoanalyse einen zu großen Raum ein und mir fehlte über weite Strecken eine Differenzierung. Die Autorin macht es sich zu leicht wenn sie die Wahlfreiheit komplett verdammt, was ja in Apathie enden würde. Sie zeigt aber auch, wann die Freiheit nur eine Illusion ist und da lohnt es sich, genauer hinzuschauen.
Langfassung
Aus der Verhaltensforschung weiß man bereits, dass mehr Auswahl nicht glücklicher macht. Ganz im Gegenteil! Es bleiben ständig Restzweifel, ob eine andere Entscheidung nicht besser gewesen wäre, oder wie es im Buch heißt:
Interessant ist auch der Punkt, dass man sich selbst Grenzen setzt um gesellschaftliche Erwartungen zu erfüllen. Leider geht die Autorin nur oberflächlich darauf ein und ich weiß nicht, ob das Vermischen überhaupt richtig ist. Durch höhere Werte oder eben dem Bedürfnis nach sozialer Zugehörigkeit geht man Kompromisse ein und beschränkt seine totale Wahlfreiheit. Man muss sich nur deutlich machen, dass es so ist und dass es auch Alternativen gibt.
Der eigentliche Grund, wieso ich das Buch lesen wollte, war die Verbindung zur Politik und zum Kapitalismus. In der heutigen Zeit ist es geradezu die Kernaussage, dass jeder Mensch alles erreichen kann - und wenn es nicht funktioniert, ist man selber Schuld. Der Markt für Selbsthilfebücher boomt und wie die Autorin richtig bemerkt, wenn das Konzept funktionieren würde und aus eigener Kraft jede Veränderung möglich wäre, würde es vielen besser gehen.
An diesem Punkt hätte ich erwartet, dass die Autorin darauf eingeht, wieso das so ist: wieso verschlingen wir Selbsthilfebücher und bekommen nicht die Ergebnisse? Oder was bedeutet es, wenn uns die vielen Entscheidungen ermüden? Leider finden sich stattdessen Ausflüge in die Psychoanalyse und ich hatte den Eindruck als ob die Wahlfreiheit komplett verdammt wird. Dabei kommt im Fazit noch mal zur Sprache, was z.T. wirklich passiert: hinter den vielen Wahlmöglichkeiten wird versteckt, dass wir im Grunde keine Wahl haben bzw. dass sie unbedeutend ist.
Sehr gut fand ich dagegen den Ansatz, dass unsere Versuche, alles rational zu erklären und Entscheidungen auf rationaler Grundlage zu fällen, nicht funktionieren. Dem schließe ich mich an, allerdings mit dem Hinweis, dass die Menschen unterschiedlich ticken. Manche reagieren spontan, andere denken alles bis zu Ende durch, und viele sind irgendwo dazwischen. Deswegen kann man meiner Meinung das Ganze nicht so einfach verallgemeinern.
Fazit
Nach dem reißerischen Titel konnte das Buch meine Erwartungen nicht erfüllen. Dafür werden die verschiedenen Sichtweisen - mit Ausnahme der Psychoanalyse - nicht tief genug ergründet.
Das Buch geht der Frage nach, welche Auswirkungen die freie Eintscheidungswahl auf den Menschen hat und ob es sie überhaupt gibt. Leider nimmt die Psychoanalyse einen zu großen Raum ein und mir fehlte über weite Strecken eine Differenzierung. Die Autorin macht es sich zu leicht wenn sie die Wahlfreiheit komplett verdammt, was ja in Apathie enden würde. Sie zeigt aber auch, wann die Freiheit nur eine Illusion ist und da lohnt es sich, genauer hinzuschauen.
Langfassung
Aus der Verhaltensforschung weiß man bereits, dass mehr Auswahl nicht glücklicher macht. Ganz im Gegenteil! Es bleiben ständig Restzweifel, ob eine andere Entscheidung nicht besser gewesen wäre, oder wie es im Buch heißt:
Durch eine Wahl verliert man etwas, was man nie besessen hat.
Interessant ist auch der Punkt, dass man sich selbst Grenzen setzt um gesellschaftliche Erwartungen zu erfüllen. Leider geht die Autorin nur oberflächlich darauf ein und ich weiß nicht, ob das Vermischen überhaupt richtig ist. Durch höhere Werte oder eben dem Bedürfnis nach sozialer Zugehörigkeit geht man Kompromisse ein und beschränkt seine totale Wahlfreiheit. Man muss sich nur deutlich machen, dass es so ist und dass es auch Alternativen gibt.
Der eigentliche Grund, wieso ich das Buch lesen wollte, war die Verbindung zur Politik und zum Kapitalismus. In der heutigen Zeit ist es geradezu die Kernaussage, dass jeder Mensch alles erreichen kann - und wenn es nicht funktioniert, ist man selber Schuld. Der Markt für Selbsthilfebücher boomt und wie die Autorin richtig bemerkt, wenn das Konzept funktionieren würde und aus eigener Kraft jede Veränderung möglich wäre, würde es vielen besser gehen.
An diesem Punkt hätte ich erwartet, dass die Autorin darauf eingeht, wieso das so ist: wieso verschlingen wir Selbsthilfebücher und bekommen nicht die Ergebnisse? Oder was bedeutet es, wenn uns die vielen Entscheidungen ermüden? Leider finden sich stattdessen Ausflüge in die Psychoanalyse und ich hatte den Eindruck als ob die Wahlfreiheit komplett verdammt wird. Dabei kommt im Fazit noch mal zur Sprache, was z.T. wirklich passiert: hinter den vielen Wahlmöglichkeiten wird versteckt, dass wir im Grunde keine Wahl haben bzw. dass sie unbedeutend ist.
Sehr gut fand ich dagegen den Ansatz, dass unsere Versuche, alles rational zu erklären und Entscheidungen auf rationaler Grundlage zu fällen, nicht funktionieren. Dem schließe ich mich an, allerdings mit dem Hinweis, dass die Menschen unterschiedlich ticken. Manche reagieren spontan, andere denken alles bis zu Ende durch, und viele sind irgendwo dazwischen. Deswegen kann man meiner Meinung das Ganze nicht so einfach verallgemeinern.
Fazit
Nach dem reißerischen Titel konnte das Buch meine Erwartungen nicht erfüllen. Dafür werden die verschiedenen Sichtweisen - mit Ausnahme der Psychoanalyse - nicht tief genug ergründet.
February 4, 2018
This was a thought-provoking book about a topic I am sure many of us have struggled with: in the economically and socially liberated West, what happens to the human psyche when it has 'too much control'? Are we ultimately happier without constraints, or are we healthier when we inhabit a society with a consensus of limits?
Beyond that powerful kernel of an idea, though, this book fell frustratingly short of the expectations set by the well-written and imaginative introduction. The text suffered from too few influences (Lacan and Freud occupy an awful lot of space, to the extent that it almost felt derivative or copy-pasted). The amalgamation of gray-area modern philosophy (post-soft science) did not feel genuinely corroborative; it felt as though the author cherry-picked philosophers agreeable to her position.
Additionally, much of the tone of the text gave the impression of an older conservative lamenting the liberatory streak of young people, grounded more in the author's personal worldview than in strains of contemporary philosophy (i.e. complaining about college students' behavior, marveling morosely at 'hookup culture', etc). Some of the 'kids these days' paragraphs were genuinely cringe-worthy.
Another major drawback was the author's use of linguistic labeling to categorize people with psychiatric disorders (as opposed to person-first language) - for example, referring to an individual as "a psychotic" or "an obsessive" (this may be how it was worded in Freud's time and text, but modern psychiatry is well beyond this category of linguistic faux pas).
Ultimately, the most disappointing factor was the author's inclusion of gender and sexuality as personal choices. She directly implies multiple times that queer folks and trans folks have made conscious, deliberate decisions in order to comprise the identity that they have. This is a spit in the face both to gender/sexuality research and to the lived experiences of queer and trans people. I imagine that cultural norms are different in Slovenia, but still... a broadly-read contemporary philosopher and public figure should be able to do better.
Again - a thought-provoking text, a quick and easy read, but filled with drawbacks that diminished the overall appeal and impact.
Beyond that powerful kernel of an idea, though, this book fell frustratingly short of the expectations set by the well-written and imaginative introduction. The text suffered from too few influences (Lacan and Freud occupy an awful lot of space, to the extent that it almost felt derivative or copy-pasted). The amalgamation of gray-area modern philosophy (post-soft science) did not feel genuinely corroborative; it felt as though the author cherry-picked philosophers agreeable to her position.
Additionally, much of the tone of the text gave the impression of an older conservative lamenting the liberatory streak of young people, grounded more in the author's personal worldview than in strains of contemporary philosophy (i.e. complaining about college students' behavior, marveling morosely at 'hookup culture', etc). Some of the 'kids these days' paragraphs were genuinely cringe-worthy.
Another major drawback was the author's use of linguistic labeling to categorize people with psychiatric disorders (as opposed to person-first language) - for example, referring to an individual as "a psychotic" or "an obsessive" (this may be how it was worded in Freud's time and text, but modern psychiatry is well beyond this category of linguistic faux pas).
Ultimately, the most disappointing factor was the author's inclusion of gender and sexuality as personal choices. She directly implies multiple times that queer folks and trans folks have made conscious, deliberate decisions in order to comprise the identity that they have. This is a spit in the face both to gender/sexuality research and to the lived experiences of queer and trans people. I imagine that cultural norms are different in Slovenia, but still... a broadly-read contemporary philosopher and public figure should be able to do better.
Again - a thought-provoking text, a quick and easy read, but filled with drawbacks that diminished the overall appeal and impact.
April 2, 2014
While this lost towards the end (with a bunch of loose ends just rolling away from the reader), I thought ~ the first half was very worth my time - and everyone's. "Choice" is basically a long feature article on an issue that is now more current than ever: How choice nowadays appears as absolute freedom, but really means absolute pressure when it comes to living and enjoying our lives, and our selves. Salecl questions this sentiment as a bastard child of capitalism, and she delivers arguments to support that. I know for me, "Choice" has been an important book to read this year.
November 7, 2014
Bu "gelişim" hiç de kişisel değil!
Gelişimin peşinde koşarken büyük ötekinin dediklerini mi yapıyorum, yoksa gerçekten seçimi ben mi yapıyorum?
Bu konuda farkındalığım arttı!
Toplumsal cinsiyet rollerinin kadınların seçimlerini etkilemesine değinilmiş, bir kadın olarak seçim yapmak bazen çok çok daha zor!
Konuya farklı yönlerden yaklaşan, sorgulayan, örnekleyen harika bi kitap! Şiddetle tavsiye edilir! ;)
November 11, 2018
Ce livre traite divers sujets annexes, de manière parfois superficielle, allant jusqu’à la psychologie et psychanalyse. On balaye donc un vaste spectre de thèmes mais le mécanisme du choix, de la décision, ou de l’indécision n’y sont pas ou peu abordés.
Décevant ...
Décevant ...
August 29, 2011
Berem v slovenščini.
April 11, 2012
It was a relief to read this and explains a lot about my behavior. Thank goodness something can.
September 30, 2024
Thought-provoking. The book will definitely resonate with those in their twenties.
December 17, 2021
There are two titles for this book, one simply Choice and this one, which I chose out of personal bias and experience, as the notion of "choice" is endemic these days, in Western culture at least and appears to be used indiscriminately in that there are always choices (patently false), and that you should want to make them at all times.
You might think of the provision of basic utilities, where the basic requirement is (to me) simply provision of a service that enables the water to come out of a tap, the light to go on when a switch is flicked and so on. If you accept a marketing culture based on "plans" and advertising (rather than what I would consider actual service) then you might disagree. There's also a deterministic, perhaps quasi-religious view, as well as a blaming aspect present in particular cultures, such as mine, which goes back many decades, my whole life at any rate.
Renata Salecl's focus is on particular aspects of "choice, notably the effect of late capitalism on people's lives. Less successful are the later elaborations of Lacan's "Big Other" and related ideas, which I couldn't grasp. This doesn't detract from the many excellent parts of this book. Her observations on self-help are incisive and her points about choice and social change (it's an impediment) are well-worth reading, if obvious to this reader.
The Chapters are: Why Choice Makes Us Anxious, Choosing Through Other's Eyes. Love Choices, Children: to have or have not?, Forced Choice.
You might think of the provision of basic utilities, where the basic requirement is (to me) simply provision of a service that enables the water to come out of a tap, the light to go on when a switch is flicked and so on. If you accept a marketing culture based on "plans" and advertising (rather than what I would consider actual service) then you might disagree. There's also a deterministic, perhaps quasi-religious view, as well as a blaming aspect present in particular cultures, such as mine, which goes back many decades, my whole life at any rate.
Renata Salecl's focus is on particular aspects of "choice, notably the effect of late capitalism on people's lives. Less successful are the later elaborations of Lacan's "Big Other" and related ideas, which I couldn't grasp. This doesn't detract from the many excellent parts of this book. Her observations on self-help are incisive and her points about choice and social change (it's an impediment) are well-worth reading, if obvious to this reader.
The Chapters are: Why Choice Makes Us Anxious, Choosing Through Other's Eyes. Love Choices, Children: to have or have not?, Forced Choice.
January 16, 2024
Muy interesenta el tema que toca el libro, hasta la primer mitad dan ganas de leerlo hasta el final pero luego aborda temas que a mi parecer hace un analisis superficial o muy limitado para la cantidad de cosas que el tema amerita, como cuando habla de Amor o de la psicologia de la eleccion.
Siento que muchas explicaciones no llevan a nada y en el capitulo final da por hecho que todo lo que explica en el libro lleva a una conclusion indiscutida como si hubiera hecho una obra maestra explicando todo con grandes fundamentos y no es el caso.
Con todo, puedo decir que disfrute leer el ensayo con la opinion de una reconocida autora y me ha hecho pensar bastante algunas cuestiones aunque no me termine de convencer lo que quiere inculcar al lector
Siento que muchas explicaciones no llevan a nada y en el capitulo final da por hecho que todo lo que explica en el libro lleva a una conclusion indiscutida como si hubiera hecho una obra maestra explicando todo con grandes fundamentos y no es el caso.
Con todo, puedo decir que disfrute leer el ensayo con la opinion de una reconocida autora y me ha hecho pensar bastante algunas cuestiones aunque no me termine de convencer lo que quiere inculcar al lector
October 6, 2024
My introduction to this book "The tyranny of choice" was through the book "Paradox of Choice". The way the author explained the difficulties faced by increase of choice through examples is good. I previously viewed more options to choose is actually good, but reading this book changed my perception.
These are other books and movies quoted by the author in this book:
1. self-help book The Road Less Traveled
2. John Gray, the author of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus
3. Fame Junkies: The Hidden Truths behind America's Favorite Addiction, Jake Halpern
4. As Stephen Covey, the author of the leading selfhelp books First Things First and The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People
5. book Practically Perfect in Every Way Niesslein
6. laws of attraction (Movie)
These are other books and movies quoted by the author in this book:
1. self-help book The Road Less Traveled
2. John Gray, the author of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus
3. Fame Junkies: The Hidden Truths behind America's Favorite Addiction, Jake Halpern
4. As Stephen Covey, the author of the leading selfhelp books First Things First and The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People
5. book Practically Perfect in Every Way Niesslein
6. laws of attraction (Movie)
May 27, 2022
Pensé que se trataría de una crítica al capitalismo. Pero no, la sumatoria de comentarios sobre la influencia del capitalismo en nuestras decisiones serán, como mucho, algunas pocas páginas (para no decir dos). En cambio, le pone mucho énfasis al psicoanálisis y la decisión como una reacción intrínseca de nuestra psiquis (subconsciente y toda la fruta freudiana). Además, lleno de comentarios dignos de clasificarse en «hablemos sin saber» kind of things. No recomiendo su lectura salvo que tengas interés en el psicoanálisis. Le doy dos estrellas solo porque fueron interesantes algunos hechos que narra y alguuuuuna que otra pequeña conclusión.
May 20, 2018
Once again Freud and Lacan show up to show us the way. Sadly, they don't. Their way is so last century, IMHO. In this book, the author splices together an explanation of why more is less and why too many choices can be limiting. While I agree with her premise, the book itself wasn't particularly enlightening on the subject of choice and its detrimental aspects but more of a rant about the particulars of modern capitalism gone awry. It was very a good vehicle for Renata Salecl to "be herself" and voice her opinions, though.
January 21, 2023
Me gustó haberme encontrado con un libro de estilo academico en este momento de mi vida. Con un tema que nos atraviesa tan fuertemente.
Si bien me imagine que planteaba otro enfoque cuando comencé a leerlo, me gustó.
"El deseo siempre implica alguna prohibición. Enseguida inventamos nuevos obstáculos cuando los viejos dejan de funcionar."
Y me dejo estas frases como consejos a mi misma:
* Podemos empezar por tratar de entender cuales son las verdaderas opciones que se nos ofrecen.
*El hecho de ser capaces de elegir es lo que nos abre la posibilidad de un cambio.
Si bien me imagine que planteaba otro enfoque cuando comencé a leerlo, me gustó.
"El deseo siempre implica alguna prohibición. Enseguida inventamos nuevos obstáculos cuando los viejos dejan de funcionar."
Y me dejo estas frases como consejos a mi misma:
* Podemos empezar por tratar de entender cuales son las verdaderas opciones que se nos ofrecen.
*El hecho de ser capaces de elegir es lo que nos abre la posibilidad de un cambio.
February 2, 2025
Są eseje ponadczasowe i są takie, do których nie ma sensu wracać po 10 latach od wydania. Ten niestety należy do tej drugiej kategorii.
Wiele zawartych tu myśli i poglądów nie najlepiej się zestarzało. Oczywiście nie ma w tym nic złego, biorąc pod uwagę, jak dynamicznie zmienia się świat. Niestety moim zdaniem tekst nie sprawdza się nawet jako kronika swoich czasów, bo mimo kilku bardziej uniwersalnych spostrzeżeń jest po prostu zbyt chaotyczny.
Cieszę się, że autorka w zakończeniu podsumowała, o co jej chodziło, bo z samej treści nie byłabym w stanie wyciągnąć tych wniosków.
Wiele zawartych tu myśli i poglądów nie najlepiej się zestarzało. Oczywiście nie ma w tym nic złego, biorąc pod uwagę, jak dynamicznie zmienia się świat. Niestety moim zdaniem tekst nie sprawdza się nawet jako kronika swoich czasów, bo mimo kilku bardziej uniwersalnych spostrzeżeń jest po prostu zbyt chaotyczny.
Cieszę się, że autorka w zakończeniu podsumowała, o co jej chodziło, bo z samej treści nie byłabym w stanie wyciągnąć tych wniosków.
February 21, 2022
“La Tiranía de la elección” es un ensayo interesante que tiene que ver con las elecciones. Siempre me interesó mucho el tema ya que creo que no nos damos cuenta de la cantidad de elecciones que hacemos todos los días y cómo los factores ambientales muchas veces nos condicionan. Este ensayo invita a la reflexión y creo que esa es una de las mejores cosas sobre el libro. También me gustó mucho el análisis que hizo la autora aunque no coincida con todo lo que dice.
November 3, 2022
No suele leer ensayos pero el tema tratado me interpeló al instante, creo que la autora aporta algunas reflexiones y ejemplos interesantes. Sin embargo, esperaba una conclusión más rica, más significativa. De la mitad del libro en adelante me pareció que empezaba a dar vueltas sobre lo mismo que ya había explicado antes.
December 1, 2023
Sanki belli bir sayıda kelime ile essay yazman gerektiği için aynı cümleleri farklı şekillerde tekrar tekrar yazmışsın gibi. Yer yer yorucu, sıkıcı.
Hayatta seçimlerimizin en özgür olanın bile aslında o kadar özgür olmadığı ve bununla ilgili verdiği detaylar fena değil, ama o kadar da özgün, yeni ve kafa açacak fikirler yok kitapta.
Kötü değil belki, ama gereksiz.
Hayatta seçimlerimizin en özgür olanın bile aslında o kadar özgür olmadığı ve bununla ilgili verdiği detaylar fena değil, ama o kadar da özgün, yeni ve kafa açacak fikirler yok kitapta.
Kötü değil belki, ama gereksiz.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews