What do you think?
Rate this book
The Myth of Choice: Personal Responsibility in a World of Limits
We are all fixated on the idea of choice. As people we love to feel we have the choice, and little offends us more than when that notion is taken away from us. Western political theory is based on the consent of the governed. Our legal systems are built upon the argument that people freely bear responsibility for the choices we make. At the heart of consumer culture is the idea that we can have it our way. But what if choice is more limited than we like to think What are the implications for us as individuals and as a society if we were to discover we have less free will than we realize In this provocative book, Kent Greenfield poses unsettling questions about the choices we make, tapping into scholarship on topics ranging from brain science to economics, political theory to sociology. His discoveries, told through an entertaining array of news events, personal anecdotes, crime stories, and legal decisions, confirm that many factors, conscious and unconscious, limit our free will. Worse, by failing to perceive them we leave ourselves open to manipulation. In The Myth of Choice, Kent Greenfield uses scores of real-life stories to explore the modern fixation on choice and our confused responses to it, but also offers useful suggestions to help us become better decision makers as individuals.
244 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 2011
19 people are currently reading
2035 people want to read
About the author
Kent Greenfield
6 books25 followersKent Greenfield is Professor of Law and Law Fund Research Scholar at Boston College Law School, where he teaches and writes in the areas of business law, constitutional law, decision making theory, legal theory, and economic analysis of law. He is the former Chair of the Section on Business Associations of the American Association of Law Schools, and a former clerk to Justice David Souter on the United States Supreme Court.
Greenfield is the author of THE MYTH OF CHOICE: PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN A WORLD OF LIMITS (forthcoming, Yale 2011). He is also the author of the book THE FAILURE OF CORPORATE LAW, published by University of Chicago Press, which has been called “simply the best and most well-reasoned progressive critique of corporate law yet written.” The Law and Politics Book Review said that “it merits a place alongside Berle and Means, [and] Easterbrook and Fischel.” He writes frequently for the Huffington Post.
Greenfield is the author of THE MYTH OF CHOICE: PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN A WORLD OF LIMITS (forthcoming, Yale 2011). He is also the author of the book THE FAILURE OF CORPORATE LAW, published by University of Chicago Press, which has been called “simply the best and most well-reasoned progressive critique of corporate law yet written.” The Law and Politics Book Review said that “it merits a place alongside Berle and Means, [and] Easterbrook and Fischel.” He writes frequently for the Huffington Post.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
October 7, 2011
The Myth of Choice: Personal Responsibility in a World of Limits> is a marvelous book. It often confirmed what I'd already thought and sometimes gave me ah-hah! moments, revealing what I hadn't guessed.
Greenfield offers up studies and anecdotes to give shape to what we already know or suspect - for instance, that if you're trying to move $279 food processors off the shelf but people keep buy the cheaper ones, start stocking a $479 food processor. Now the $279 one doesn't look as expensive, and people buy it with abandon.
Or how about the idea we have that if something is good, more of it must be better - including choice. So now there's the table of jams for sale. With a few selections, people taste, choose, and buy. With more selection, people taste, get frustrated, and don't buy.
At a casino table, are you more likely to put down $25 in cash or a plastic chip worth $25? Are you more likely to buy the product at eye level or the one by the floor?
Greenfield builds a coherent case that there's a balance involved regarding personal responsibility. Yes, he writes, we're personally responsible - for our weight, for example. But when our government subsidizes corn syrup, when advertising is so effective, when we plan (or don't plan) so that our communities require a car for getting around and there are no safe bike paths - you get the picture. My personal responsibility actually extends beyond whether I've got extra pounds or not. I do bear some responsibility for your extra weight, if I haven't spoken up about what's right. We have a shared responsibility for one another.
It's like a beginning-of-the-school-year lecture I once heard at a Jesuit high school. The teacher explained to her class that how much they learned in the coming months depended not only on her but also on them. If they were respectful, didn't waste class time, and offered good insights, their classmates would learn more.
Greenfield writes, "Too often the rhetoric of personal responsibility essentially urges the rest of us not to care about our fellow citizens. It avoids any sense of shared concern, of shared responsibility for others. That's why I'm against it."
Greenfield also lays out the case that people don't change much. If at all. Our environments shape us, sure, but the older we get, the more we're who we already are, and the less likely we are to do something unpredictable.
In the end, does it help us to know hat we are more easily manipulated and our brains more hard-wired than we would like? Greenfield says yes. Knowing that there's quicksand in the field up ahead does indeed help us avoid getting caught in it.
He offers more advice as well. "We tend to live better if we choose our lives than if they are given to or imposed on us." We need to exercise our choice muscles, so that they don't get flabby. For me, this means don't be a sidekick. Greenfield also gives the advice of a friend who says his secret to discipline and integrity is to not put himself in situations where he might be tempted.
There's a lot to this book - it's one I'm going to keep on my shelf and refer to. Recommended. (Disclaimer - I received the book through a Goodreads First Reads giveaway.)
Greenfield offers up studies and anecdotes to give shape to what we already know or suspect - for instance, that if you're trying to move $279 food processors off the shelf but people keep buy the cheaper ones, start stocking a $479 food processor. Now the $279 one doesn't look as expensive, and people buy it with abandon.
Or how about the idea we have that if something is good, more of it must be better - including choice. So now there's the table of jams for sale. With a few selections, people taste, choose, and buy. With more selection, people taste, get frustrated, and don't buy.
At a casino table, are you more likely to put down $25 in cash or a plastic chip worth $25? Are you more likely to buy the product at eye level or the one by the floor?
Greenfield builds a coherent case that there's a balance involved regarding personal responsibility. Yes, he writes, we're personally responsible - for our weight, for example. But when our government subsidizes corn syrup, when advertising is so effective, when we plan (or don't plan) so that our communities require a car for getting around and there are no safe bike paths - you get the picture. My personal responsibility actually extends beyond whether I've got extra pounds or not. I do bear some responsibility for your extra weight, if I haven't spoken up about what's right. We have a shared responsibility for one another.
It's like a beginning-of-the-school-year lecture I once heard at a Jesuit high school. The teacher explained to her class that how much they learned in the coming months depended not only on her but also on them. If they were respectful, didn't waste class time, and offered good insights, their classmates would learn more.
Greenfield writes, "Too often the rhetoric of personal responsibility essentially urges the rest of us not to care about our fellow citizens. It avoids any sense of shared concern, of shared responsibility for others. That's why I'm against it."
Greenfield also lays out the case that people don't change much. If at all. Our environments shape us, sure, but the older we get, the more we're who we already are, and the less likely we are to do something unpredictable.
In the end, does it help us to know hat we are more easily manipulated and our brains more hard-wired than we would like? Greenfield says yes. Knowing that there's quicksand in the field up ahead does indeed help us avoid getting caught in it.
He offers more advice as well. "We tend to live better if we choose our lives than if they are given to or imposed on us." We need to exercise our choice muscles, so that they don't get flabby. For me, this means don't be a sidekick. Greenfield also gives the advice of a friend who says his secret to discipline and integrity is to not put himself in situations where he might be tempted.
There's a lot to this book - it's one I'm going to keep on my shelf and refer to. Recommended. (Disclaimer - I received the book through a Goodreads First Reads giveaway.)
October 9, 2011
Disclaimer: I received a free copy of this book from the publisher via the Goodreads First Reads program. (Awesome!)
I get the feeling that this book was born out of the author's frustration with the current state of affairs in politics. A lot of examples that are chosen (ha!) involve the Tea Party, and illustrate how, exactly their rhetoric is wrong. (Not that this is difficult.) This is VERY much a book written by and for Americans. The writing style is easy and conversational, and reminded me a lot of Malcom Gladwell - my initial impression was that this was another effort to capitalize on the marketable success of Gladwell's books.
One of the problems with this topic is that there are SO MANY examples of how choice is a myth. In the introduction alone, the author assails the reader with a rapid-fire barrage of situations - it becomes a little overwhelming. For example, on pages 32-33 of the ARC, you get: Obamacare, Unionization from the unions' point of view, Unionization from business' point of view, Tort Reform, Dietary Choices (fast food), and Gay Rights. On TWO PAGES. Obviously, none of those topics is examined in great detail. You get the feeling, as a reader, that if you skim over one paragraph, you are going to be missing a whole topic, or at least a major point.
This improves slightly in later chapters, but there is still a LOT of information that is not necessarily conveyed in the most understandable way. The best sections involve legal cases, which are explained clearly and concisely, in an eminently relatable style. In these sections it is very obvious that the author is a legal scholar and law professor. However, because of the legal background of the author, the central thesis of choice sometimes becomes muddied – are we talking about choice as a myth from a societal point of view, or from a legal point of view? Or both?
A lot of this is written as kind of a first-person narrative, and the author includes himself and his family when he wants to make a point or use someone as an example. Although this is written through the lens of a privileged scholar from Cambridge, the author points out these biases, and acknowledges his cultural and social assumptions. I do kind of love the section involving Salazar v. Bueno where the author is poking fun at Justice Scalia’s ego. The section describing Justice Souter’s intellectual empathy is also terrific.
But it does seem that because this book is so “of the moment” that it will easily and quickly become outdated – there are so many up to date modern cultural references and examples cited that it gets a little exhausting. As I got toward the end of the book I was half expecting to see a section about Occupy Wall Street. (There wasn’t.)
I kind of wish the author had been more selective and concise in his examples, and had stuck more to the topics he is clearly an expert in, rather than trying to diversify the topic. Even with all that effort, this book is only written for a narrow audience – Americans, and those that are in opposition to much of the current political climate at that.
I get the feeling that this book was born out of the author's frustration with the current state of affairs in politics. A lot of examples that are chosen (ha!) involve the Tea Party, and illustrate how, exactly their rhetoric is wrong. (Not that this is difficult.) This is VERY much a book written by and for Americans. The writing style is easy and conversational, and reminded me a lot of Malcom Gladwell - my initial impression was that this was another effort to capitalize on the marketable success of Gladwell's books.
One of the problems with this topic is that there are SO MANY examples of how choice is a myth. In the introduction alone, the author assails the reader with a rapid-fire barrage of situations - it becomes a little overwhelming. For example, on pages 32-33 of the ARC, you get: Obamacare, Unionization from the unions' point of view, Unionization from business' point of view, Tort Reform, Dietary Choices (fast food), and Gay Rights. On TWO PAGES. Obviously, none of those topics is examined in great detail. You get the feeling, as a reader, that if you skim over one paragraph, you are going to be missing a whole topic, or at least a major point.
This improves slightly in later chapters, but there is still a LOT of information that is not necessarily conveyed in the most understandable way. The best sections involve legal cases, which are explained clearly and concisely, in an eminently relatable style. In these sections it is very obvious that the author is a legal scholar and law professor. However, because of the legal background of the author, the central thesis of choice sometimes becomes muddied – are we talking about choice as a myth from a societal point of view, or from a legal point of view? Or both?
A lot of this is written as kind of a first-person narrative, and the author includes himself and his family when he wants to make a point or use someone as an example. Although this is written through the lens of a privileged scholar from Cambridge, the author points out these biases, and acknowledges his cultural and social assumptions. I do kind of love the section involving Salazar v. Bueno where the author is poking fun at Justice Scalia’s ego. The section describing Justice Souter’s intellectual empathy is also terrific.
But it does seem that because this book is so “of the moment” that it will easily and quickly become outdated – there are so many up to date modern cultural references and examples cited that it gets a little exhausting. As I got toward the end of the book I was half expecting to see a section about Occupy Wall Street. (There wasn’t.)
I kind of wish the author had been more selective and concise in his examples, and had stuck more to the topics he is clearly an expert in, rather than trying to diversify the topic. Even with all that effort, this book is only written for a narrow audience – Americans, and those that are in opposition to much of the current political climate at that.
September 9, 2015
(Sept. book club selection) This book is somewhat Malcolm Gladwell-ish, although I didn't find it quite as enjoyable to read. Greenfield brings up several thought-provoking issues in relation to how we make choices and what factors influence those choices, and he argues that many times our decisions are affected by outside factors that we may or may not be aware of. He does a good job of summing up his findings and suggesting ways we can be more effective decision-makers. He says, "One thing I am absolutely sure about: this control [to make choices] is not innately robust. It takes effort, and we can be good or bad at it. We can develop our choice "muscles" or let them go flabby. There are things we can do to improve our abilities to make good choices." He then goes on to suggest four things that he thinks are critical: recognize the power of situation, acknowledge our irrationalities, be mindful of habits, and cultivate awareness of cultural influences. I feel like I learned a few things that will help me be more cognizant of my daily decisions and more mindful of how I can use that power wisely and effectively.
October 22, 2014
I'm afraid that this book did not impress me. The author presents some interesting ideas about consumer culture and how we're constantly influenced towards making our own "decisions," but the book itself is not terribly well written. Greenfield injects far too much of himself into the arguments. I would have much preferred to watch him prove his points logically through the use of scientific/academic sources, as opposed to relying upon anecdotes and personal experiences. At times, Greenfield threw in so many small stories that 5-6 would be referenced on the same page. He bounces around for the sake of shock and amusement without fully expanding upon the significance of each tale.
As it is, this is the type of book that you would bring up in cocktail party discussions so that you'd have an interesting short story to tell.
As it is, this is the type of book that you would bring up in cocktail party discussions so that you'd have an interesting short story to tell.
September 16, 2015
Even though I may not have enjoyed the writing style as much in this book, there are some thoughts I will take with me and love remembering.
1.) Errors are the portals to discovery
2.) Culture creates norms, Culture enforces norms. and for many of us, much of the time, culture influences decisions so much that the scope of genuine choice is exceedingly small.
3.) We tend to live better if we choose our lives than if they are given to or imposed on us.
Also, I really liked this idea....
4.) Control is not innately robust. It takes effort, and we can be good or bad at it. We can develop our choice muscles or let them go flabby. To improve our abilities to make good choices we should acknowledge the power of a situation and circumstance. Recognize our tendencies to relinquish control and to succumb to the influences of our environment.
It was a good discussion book for book-group.
1.) Errors are the portals to discovery
2.) Culture creates norms, Culture enforces norms. and for many of us, much of the time, culture influences decisions so much that the scope of genuine choice is exceedingly small.
3.) We tend to live better if we choose our lives than if they are given to or imposed on us.
Also, I really liked this idea....
4.) Control is not innately robust. It takes effort, and we can be good or bad at it. We can develop our choice muscles or let them go flabby. To improve our abilities to make good choices we should acknowledge the power of a situation and circumstance. Recognize our tendencies to relinquish control and to succumb to the influences of our environment.
It was a good discussion book for book-group.
October 10, 2011
Many thanks to the Goodreads First Reads for sending me this book! It's definitely one of the favorite books that I've won.
The Myth of Choice: Personal Responsibility in a World of Limits is much more exciting than the title might suggest. I learned a lot about why we make certain choices, what influences us (brain chemistry for example - something I didn't suspect had anything to do with my choices), and how in certain instances we don't have as much choice as we believed.
What makes this book so interesting is the smooth, easy, fun language that almost reads as if the author is having a conversation with us, his readers. The anecdotes/stories underscored nicely this or that point. It's pretty clear that Kent Greenfield knows about this topic, but it's also clear that he cares about the topic (the choices we make and WHY we make them), and this is not something I can say about many books out there.
The Myth of Choice: Personal Responsibility in a World of Limits is much more exciting than the title might suggest. I learned a lot about why we make certain choices, what influences us (brain chemistry for example - something I didn't suspect had anything to do with my choices), and how in certain instances we don't have as much choice as we believed.
What makes this book so interesting is the smooth, easy, fun language that almost reads as if the author is having a conversation with us, his readers. The anecdotes/stories underscored nicely this or that point. It's pretty clear that Kent Greenfield knows about this topic, but it's also clear that he cares about the topic (the choices we make and WHY we make them), and this is not something I can say about many books out there.
May 13, 2012
This is a great read for someone who wants to reflect a bit on the human psyche while still reading something easy to digest. The title of this book makes it sound more severe than it is because the author clearly believes that people have choices - there are just very powerful factors that influence choice, and some situations that are framed as choices really aren't choices at all.
I liked the author's use of sociological studies and historical events to illustrate his points. For me, at least, that really enhanced the read. The whole thing did get a bit redundant towards the end, though, and the author got unnecessarily political. I think that will turn a lot of people away who (because of their own biases, as illuminated in this book) don't share the same views.
In any event, this is worth reading if you are interested in sociology and challenging your possibly antiquated perspectives on this modern world.
I liked the author's use of sociological studies and historical events to illustrate his points. For me, at least, that really enhanced the read. The whole thing did get a bit redundant towards the end, though, and the author got unnecessarily political. I think that will turn a lot of people away who (because of their own biases, as illuminated in this book) don't share the same views.
In any event, this is worth reading if you are interested in sociology and challenging your possibly antiquated perspectives on this modern world.
March 15, 2017
This book is well-researched, easily understandable and very readable.
The subject was primarily about understanding and being aware of what influences and limits our choices. The author is a law professor and he uses laws and cases to explain many of his points. He uses anecdotes, books and movies to illustrate his points. I particularly liked the explanations of the ways our brains and memories trick us into making certain choices.
I'm very happy that I read this book.
I won this on 8/26/11 through the goodreads first-reads program. Received this today. It's an Advanced uncorrected proof. It has the notes section and credits, but not the index. The table of contents lists everything, but without page numbers.
The subject was primarily about understanding and being aware of what influences and limits our choices. The author is a law professor and he uses laws and cases to explain many of his points. He uses anecdotes, books and movies to illustrate his points. I particularly liked the explanations of the ways our brains and memories trick us into making certain choices.
I'm very happy that I read this book.
I won this on 8/26/11 through the goodreads first-reads program. Received this today. It's an Advanced uncorrected proof. It has the notes section and credits, but not the index. The table of contents lists everything, but without page numbers.
October 1, 2011
As expected this is an erudite and well thought out examination of how we make decisions and the external and internal influences on those decisions. What was not expected but very much welcomed is that this is an accessible and highly engaging read. Kent intersperses his arguments with many anecdotal stories that help bring clarity to the concepts. This book will appeal to a general audience as well as to those with more academic leanings. There are plenty of notes which can lead to a more indepth analysis of peronal choice and responsibility.
Overall, I highly recommend this book. It certainly gives insight into why we choose and pause to consider how influenced to do so.
This book was received as a First Reads Reviewer
Overall, I highly recommend this book. It certainly gives insight into why we choose and pause to consider how influenced to do so.
This book was received as a First Reads Reviewer
October 7, 2011
"The Myth of Choice: Personal Responsibility in a World of Limits" by Kent Greenfield is a very insightful examination of "choice" and our belief system as it revolves around the choices we make, the consequences for our choices, and the sometimes misguided perception that we have a choice at all. Greenfield presents his views very sensibly and supports them with, in most instances, anecdotal evidence, which can be very convincing. This book is definitely worth reading, especially for those who may want to bolster their positions regarding personal causes, or for potential litigation. It may not be case history, but certainly gives the audience plenty to chew on.
Read
October 7, 2011I won this book on goodreads and was excited to get started on it. I really like how he explains things and uses his own personal experiances to help you understand the concepts. Everyone should read because it will open your eyes not just about the choices you make but help you understand why other people make the choices they do.
August 6, 2014
This is probably my fault for attempting to read this during a busy family weekend, but I found much of the discussion and topics raised to be better addressed in other books I have read. The odd use of photographs as well as the cursory attention paid to some of the issues made this a rather non-compelling read.
July 24, 2015
Interesting book that discusses the amount of choice that we really have in day to day life. Many fail to realize how much of their choice is really guided through outside influences and regulations.
September 20, 2011
An eye-opening, fun, and smart look at the many things that effect and influence the choices we make. Very anecdotal and accessible. This book is a life changer.
December 11, 2015
I choose to write a review at a later date. Not really.
August 27, 2022
What a great book to realize that, when we make choices, we sometimes forget how many other factors go into the decision making process, in other words NO choice is done out of a blank vaccuum of space - there is, as this book points out, cultural, environmental, nature / our biology, social influences.
I love how the book opens up with one of my absolute favourite quotes in the world =)
It is not our abilities that show what we truly are - it is our choices.
Albus Dumbledore. Chamber of Secrets.
What we choose defines who we are.
We shape our lives and we shape ourselves, and the choices we make are ultimately our own responsibility.
Life is the sum of all your choices.
Destiney is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice.
A man is responsible for his choice and must accept the consequenes whatever they may be.
Obama: At the end of the day, the circumstances of your life: what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you've got going on at home: none of this is an excuse for neglecting homework or having a bad attitude in school. THere is no excuse for not trying.
Where you are right now doesn't have to determine where you'll end up. No one has written your destiny for you. Here in America you write your own destiny. You make your own future.
Everybody thinks of changing humanity and no one thinks of changing himself.
Tolstoy
I love how the book opens up with one of my absolute favourite quotes in the world =)
It is not our abilities that show what we truly are - it is our choices.
Albus Dumbledore. Chamber of Secrets.
What we choose defines who we are.
We shape our lives and we shape ourselves, and the choices we make are ultimately our own responsibility.
Life is the sum of all your choices.
Destiney is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice.
A man is responsible for his choice and must accept the consequenes whatever they may be.
Obama: At the end of the day, the circumstances of your life: what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you've got going on at home: none of this is an excuse for neglecting homework or having a bad attitude in school. THere is no excuse for not trying.
Where you are right now doesn't have to determine where you'll end up. No one has written your destiny for you. Here in America you write your own destiny. You make your own future.
Everybody thinks of changing humanity and no one thinks of changing himself.
Tolstoy
March 7, 2018
The author approaches the subject of choice from a legal and moral perspective.
His main thesis is that often we see our own outcomes as significantly influenced by circumstances while we tend to perceive the outcomes of others more functionally as outcome of their specific choices.
He argues a.o. that the authors of Nudge miss the essential challenge with their benevolent desire to have a paternalistic libertarian zero-point rather than an un-considered zero-point for choice architecture .
For him the essential challenge is that many of our perceived choice-freedom is implicitely constrained by elements that are often unconscious: our culture (is being able to wear a hajib a choice or is the wearing of it precursor to abolition of choice), power (how free is our choice when all around us insist there's only 1 course of action) etc.
Another interesting consideration is our tendency to sympathise more with those suffering an unexpected outcome as consequence of a deliberate choice (ie going to baseball and getting ball in the face) versus sympathising with those suffering an expected outcome as consequence of a "forced" choice (ie work-injury)
Well written and cause for reflection I enjoyed the read
His main thesis is that often we see our own outcomes as significantly influenced by circumstances while we tend to perceive the outcomes of others more functionally as outcome of their specific choices.
He argues a.o. that the authors of Nudge miss the essential challenge with their benevolent desire to have a paternalistic libertarian zero-point rather than an un-considered zero-point for choice architecture .
For him the essential challenge is that many of our perceived choice-freedom is implicitely constrained by elements that are often unconscious: our culture (is being able to wear a hajib a choice or is the wearing of it precursor to abolition of choice), power (how free is our choice when all around us insist there's only 1 course of action) etc.
Another interesting consideration is our tendency to sympathise more with those suffering an unexpected outcome as consequence of a deliberate choice (ie going to baseball and getting ball in the face) versus sympathising with those suffering an expected outcome as consequence of a "forced" choice (ie work-injury)
Well written and cause for reflection I enjoyed the read
September 13, 2017
This is an excellent exposition of choice as a cultural element of our society; choice is explored through a variety of perspectives. The book is also a serious look at the ways our freedom of choice is undermined. Fortunately, the book ends on a positive note by considering ways in which we can guard against our own weaknesses in thinking, but also against the directed manipulation of others.
The author explores choice as an element of sexuality, including personal orientation and also the issues of coercion in cases of rape. As noted earlier, he spends a fair amount if time looking at the variety of ways our choice becomes a vector of manipulation of people by advertisers. From a psychological perspective, he explores the Milgram experiments, and touches on the power (or threat) of group-think.
He also delves into choice as to how it is perceived in the eyes (definitely multiple here!) of the law, using a variety of cases and judges as examples of how choice can be perceived.
The author explores choice as an element of sexuality, including personal orientation and also the issues of coercion in cases of rape. As noted earlier, he spends a fair amount if time looking at the variety of ways our choice becomes a vector of manipulation of people by advertisers. From a psychological perspective, he explores the Milgram experiments, and touches on the power (or threat) of group-think.
He also delves into choice as to how it is perceived in the eyes (definitely multiple here!) of the law, using a variety of cases and judges as examples of how choice can be perceived.
February 8, 2023
"the most perfect coercion will always appear as choice" !!!! worddd kent wordd
only reached for this bc i wanted to see what occupies the mind of my con law prof. & i do generally find work involving "choice" to be quite interesting - but i actually found this v enjoyable---
to evaluate how we live in a world of constraints does not necessarily make for a novel topic, but greenfield's mellifluous & wide-ranging discussion of choice rhetoric in our lives is nuanced, entertaining, and lowkey <3heart eyes<3 ??? he expansively examines the limits an individual faces within cultural, market, & power systems. he gives sum interesting insights on consumer culture- rly enjoyed his chapt. on how markets not only often fail to provide free choice, but influence our conception of free choice- yooo this guys my constitutional law king PROFESSOR - five out of five for his autodidacticism thanks kent for helping me complete my yearly book goal of 1
only reached for this bc i wanted to see what occupies the mind of my con law prof. & i do generally find work involving "choice" to be quite interesting - but i actually found this v enjoyable---
to evaluate how we live in a world of constraints does not necessarily make for a novel topic, but greenfield's mellifluous & wide-ranging discussion of choice rhetoric in our lives is nuanced, entertaining, and lowkey <3heart eyes<3 ??? he expansively examines the limits an individual faces within cultural, market, & power systems. he gives sum interesting insights on consumer culture- rly enjoyed his chapt. on how markets not only often fail to provide free choice, but influence our conception of free choice- yooo this guys my constitutional law king PROFESSOR - five out of five for his autodidacticism thanks kent for helping me complete my yearly book goal of 1
March 4, 2018
Really interesting book that posits that we don't really have choices, we just think we do. It talks about the biology that goes into decision making and also habits, which habits, in general create short cuts for decision making. It creates anti-decisions. Many other things such as marketing manipulation create and manufacture what we think are decisions but really forces people into cattle chutes.
October 11, 2017
Good tidbits of information. But it's written from a very legal perspective, and wasn't surprised to then learn the writer is a legal academic and not a psychology or business academic.
Very dry. Lots of legal anecdotes. But he does pose interesting questions about what choice really means when other socio-economic considerations are recognized.
Very dry. Lots of legal anecdotes. But he does pose interesting questions about what choice really means when other socio-economic considerations are recognized.
December 12, 2017
I liked it, but I wish I had read this before I'd taken any psych or criminology classes... I knew a lot about the information included beforehand. It was an easy read, at least, if not a little repetitive.
July 5, 2017
This isn’t a book I can easily describe because it covers so much ground. I’m still thinking over several of the author’s points. I suspect I may change my mind about how I respond to some major issues over time
May 31, 2017
Not very good, the title says choice is a myth, very so often he drifts to say things like you have a choice. At other points he becomes way too biased with his obvious political agenda.
September 7, 2017
I absolutely loved this book. It presented the material in a graspable and appropriate manner for the audience. The anecdotes were vital and drove home every point the author was trying to make.
December 24, 2023
The book is full of interesting ideas but it's not a well written book.
January 24, 2020
One day at one of my college reunion, I went into the library to see what was new, if anything. I selected a book from a nearby stack and started reading it. The stack was on "law," which I thought curious, as my college had no law school. It turns out that the book was written by a lawyer and really concerned internal and external limitations and obstructions to informed decision-making (in law and otherwise). I read it greedily for an hour, picked up, and then went off to the college radio station. Anyhow, the subject of the book gnawed on me for a number of years, and I finally bought it. It's a very credible treatment of the subject and easily read. It's a good read.
February 28, 2017
Good book although it is hard to understand some parts of it if you are not American.
I used to believe that we have the freedom of choice and build our lives,but as I get older I realized that choices in life are more life that we think. we like to believe that we can be whatever we want to be but that's not the truth. biology, culture ,luck and circumstances influences if not decides our destiny.
I used to believe that we have the freedom of choice and build our lives,but as I get older I realized that choices in life are more life that we think. we like to believe that we can be whatever we want to be but that's not the truth. biology, culture ,luck and circumstances influences if not decides our destiny.
November 28, 2015
There was nothing particularly new or compelling in this book. Only four years after its publication, it already felt dated to me in some aspects. I had hoped it would unveil areas of our lives over which we truly have no choice (e.g. birth, parentage), but it instead hashed through the same ideas of environmental manipulation constraining people from having reasonable choices (think "white privilege" arguments).
In my own reading, The Myth of Choice followed close on the heels of Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, and it felt like a younger sibling trying to emulate older brother. Some of the random examples Greenfield uses to illustrate his points are interesting, but others are thin and strained. (It might have been okay to tell about vacuum shopping as an example of overwhelming choice, but to illustrate this with a portrait of your dog? Really?)
It is obvious Mr. Greenfield's expertise is law. Sometimes this provides fascinating legal case studies. It is also obvious he has strong liberal leanings. His attempts to temper his liberalism are awkward at best. ("Look! I am admitting that I like this one phrase in the Lord's Prayer. I like something Jesus said. Did you catch that?") In the end, the book devolves into a rah-rah rallying for government regulation to compensate for people's circumstances that constrain their ability to make meaningful choices.
In my own reading, The Myth of Choice followed close on the heels of Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, and it felt like a younger sibling trying to emulate older brother. Some of the random examples Greenfield uses to illustrate his points are interesting, but others are thin and strained. (It might have been okay to tell about vacuum shopping as an example of overwhelming choice, but to illustrate this with a portrait of your dog? Really?)
It is obvious Mr. Greenfield's expertise is law. Sometimes this provides fascinating legal case studies. It is also obvious he has strong liberal leanings. His attempts to temper his liberalism are awkward at best. ("Look! I am admitting that I like this one phrase in the Lord's Prayer. I like something Jesus said. Did you catch that?") In the end, the book devolves into a rah-rah rallying for government regulation to compensate for people's circumstances that constrain their ability to make meaningful choices.
January 12, 2012
There is a cartoon in the middle of the book that shows two fish in a bowl, presumably a father and son. The line underneath states: "You can be anything you want to be--no limits." The main point of the book is that we are free to choose, but only within our own fishbowls, constraints which are made up of context: biology, culture, etc. Power, economics and the free market, and even brain chemistry put strong contraints on our options. A fascinating read.
Some things that stood out for me:
The reason advertising works so well in a free market is because we all take (necessary) mental shortcuts when shopping, delegating most of our decisions to our subconscious.
Our collective "choice" to allow Wal-marts to take over isn't a choice in the meaningful sense. It is a sum of many small decisions on where to buy one or two things that cause the small stores to eventually go out of business.
The rhetoric of personal responsibility is often a cover for the avoidance of shared responsibility. When things go wrong, the person at the end of the causal chain usually isn't the only one to blame, but in our society, that is what ends up happening.
Intellectual empathy is understanding the limitations others face. People who make bad choices should at least be given the opportunity to tell their stories.
Some things that stood out for me:
The reason advertising works so well in a free market is because we all take (necessary) mental shortcuts when shopping, delegating most of our decisions to our subconscious.
Our collective "choice" to allow Wal-marts to take over isn't a choice in the meaningful sense. It is a sum of many small decisions on where to buy one or two things that cause the small stores to eventually go out of business.
The rhetoric of personal responsibility is often a cover for the avoidance of shared responsibility. When things go wrong, the person at the end of the causal chain usually isn't the only one to blame, but in our society, that is what ends up happening.
Intellectual empathy is understanding the limitations others face. People who make bad choices should at least be given the opportunity to tell their stories.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews