Ballet Slippers or Adorable?

In a TED video by Sheena Iyengar (Ballet Slippers or Adorable?) on the art of choosing, Dr. Iyengar assumes that Americans believe the following when it comes to making choices:

Make your own choices,
More options lead to better choices, and
Never say no to choice.

There are two sides to each of these assumptions. It is a human right to make ones own choices. However, one must have the choice to relinquish one's own choice onto others who they deem to be more responsible or knowledgeable about a problem or to care for an issue. Sometimes the person they are relinquishing power over to is not more capable than they are to do the work for them, but the person has chosen for another to assume responsibility simply because they do not find it important enough to do themselves or they are not interested in doing it themselves.
 Examples of this action in play on an everyday level are:

• Travelers have an option to drive themselves to their destinations, assuming all responsibility for their arrival time, speed and overall safety; however, many travelers choose to use public transportation, as they believe it is a better choice (as assumption #2 suggests) for themselves (a convenience to not have to face the stressors of traffic, to be able to have extra time to complete work, listen to music or read while in route, saves on gas money and parking fees in some areas) and for the environment (reduces the use of natural resources and carbon emissions). However, if an injury occurs on public transportation due to the negligence of a bus driver, the 

• In a democratic republic such as the US, voters choose to vote for representatives who are elected to represent the beliefs of the people. Some people choose to not vote, and thus, have chosen to not exercise their right to choose their representatives.

In public transportation, it can be assumed without much difference in effect that a bus rider believes there are many benefits to themselves and to society for choosing public transportation over personal vehicles. Because there are macro benefits, I would agree that Iyengar's assumption that more options lead to better choices is true, because the choice gives us access to modes that are less attainable to the average person. Most American households have cars; however, many fewer have access to personal trains, planes, and boats/ships. Because of the benefits associated with these more expensive and technical ways to travel, it is a better choice to have these options than to limit oneself to only personal car or public bus. Taking a plane from South Carolina to Arizona is far more convenient than driving the 2000+ miles.In voting, there are many benefits to having choices on whom to vote for. It is quite important to have choices in voting because a democratic republic functions on having the person elected to be accountable for the use of the power given by the people. There are countless topics that constituents care about, and our goal as citizens to to elect the representatives whose views align in most, if not all, of the topics we care most about. For this reason, it would be unwise to limit the choices; however, there are set limits. Qualifications are limiters. A teenager cannot run for president of the United States. Perhaps I thought this person may be the best leader for my belief crusade. However, even if "the people" wanted this change, there are very few choices in how to un-limit the choice:
"First, amendment can take place by a vote of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures (ratification by thirty-eight states would be required to ratify an amendment today).  This first method of amendment is the only one used to date.  Second, the Constitution might be amended by a Convention called for this purpose by two-thirds of the state legislatures, if the Convention's proposed amendments are later ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures."
Where I will differ from Iyengar is #3, saying no to choice. Simply stating no is not the only way to deny choice. For example, take the example on public transportation noted above; based on efficiency, it may be convenient to travel by air, but it is an expense choice. A lack of financial resources may block this choice. Time can also play into this being an option; if a traveler needs to get somewhere without planning ahead, it may not be possible, due to limited resources within this mode (all seats are booked for a late-minute Christmas flight, for example). In voting, saying no to choice may not involve a denial of choice, but red tape. Access to making change can serve as a denial of choice.
In conclusion, though choice is preferred, choice can be limited due to resources. Choice can also be perceived as our own when we are merely reacting to external influences, which stem from our desire to be seen as culturally in tune. Iyengar's notes this in her final example of perceived choice, when she exercises he Action Research skills on two women choosing pink nail polish for her. Iyengar asked two women to decide a nail polish color for her. Because she is blind, she asks for them to describe the differences of the colors to her. The women do a poor job, essentially using descriptive synonyms to  note meaningless differences within Iyengar's choices. Just as with the Walmart and Sprite soda options, to the commercialized consumer, there are obvious differences. However, without the labeling, we would be "blind" (as Iyengar actually is) to the differences, which are essentially absent to begin with.




Iyengar's comments on leadership note that sometimes companies take advantage of our assumption that choice is good, and with more choice, we will be able to make the best decisions for ourselves. Why? Because the leaders of these companies who give us all the choice we desire simultaneously market to us that we should not desire the most economically just buy, but the buy that most aptly displays freedom of choice; that is freedom defined as "the power to determine action without restraint." 
Instead of buying food that is healthy, we buy food that is marketed within pop culture. There are no commercials about apples, or home-cooked meals; there are dozens of commercials played during one hour of prime-time television which market fast food, chips, and heat-and-eat meals like Hamburger Helper or On-Cor. Even water, a nearly-free resource that runs out of the tap in most American homes, is packaged as if there is difference in quality between bottled and free-flowing. This mantra of unlimited choice can be unhealthy; restraint, or willpower, is a virtue. Perhaps American can leave from our Russian counterparts, who have blinders to the facade of choice we've come to appreciate. Iyengar notes a test in which Russians were told to choose between seven different types of soda:
"'How many choices are these?' Again and again, they perceived these seven different sodas, not as seven choices, but as one choice: soda or no soda. When I put out juice and water in addition to these seven sodas, now they perceived it as only three choices -- juice, water and soda. Compare this to the die-hard devotion of many Americans, not just to a particular flavor of soda, but to a particular brand."
Imagine if we were less inundated in media persuasion over choosing the  "most popular" product, and just bought the Walmart-brand lemon-lime soda instead of the Sprite. If we took the labels off, would the volume of the two products be the same? Yes; they both come in a 12-ounce option. They both come in a lime green plastic casing. They have the same ingredients (NEITHER CONTAINS REAL LEMON OR LIME, BTW) The Walmart brand, however, is cheaper; Walmart's brand also provides 10 extra calories per 12 oz than Sprite.
I have yet to see a Walmart commercial on their soda, but the brand loyalty to Sprite would not make a media push for this particular item reasonable; it presents a conflict of interest and does not promote the goals of marketing: to ensure profitability. 

References

MyFitnessPal. Nutrition Facts Soda, Sprite - Soda, Sprite. Accessed at  http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/149735399



MyFitnessPal. Nutrition Facts Walmart Great Value - Twist Up Lemon Lime Soda. Accessed at      http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/walmart-great-value-twist-up-lemon-lime-soda-109763519#
University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law.  Exploring Constitutional Conflicts, Article V: Amending the  Constitution, Accessed by http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/articleV.htm