Satisfiers and Maximizers

Rabbi Melanie Aron

Friday, November 21, 2008

When we are at the supermarket and come to the cereal aisle, most of the time, we just reach for whatever we bought last week. Occasionally we will grab something we saw advertised, or might stop to compare two or three similar looking boxes. What we don’t do is to read the labels on every cereal available and search for the absolutely best of all the choices offered us. That is because with regard to breakfast foods we are what economists today call satisfiers and not maximizers- which is fortunate, because we have other things to do with our lives besides shopping for cereal.

In this week’s Torah portion, Eliezer, Abraham’s servant, takes a satisfiers approach to his search for a bride for Isaac. With God’s help, he establishes some criteria, and when they are filled, he views his search as complete. Once Rebecca offers to bring water for him and his camels, he does not look around to see if there are other young woman who might do the same. Proceeding this way, he experiences no regrets about the other women he might have chosen but did not, nor does he dwell on counterfactuals,  the “if only I can kept on searching” scenarios.

Eliezer can be contrasted with King Ahashverosh, in the Purim story. We know from the way that Ahasverosh is presented throughout the Book of Esther, that he is a foolish king, who chooses to do unwise things. When he sends Vashti away, his approach to finding a replacement is to gather all the women of the kingdom, and conduct a search lasting over a year. He is setting himself up for regret, as he will experience the opportunity costs of thinking about every woman he has not chosen. In addition, having sent Vashti away, he will feel his decision is reversible. This is another factor which leads to greater unhappiness, as he will always feel that he could potentially do better. It is fortunate that Esther wins the good will of the king’s servants through her modest and kind behavior, and thus has an advantage in this competition, or Ahashverosh might never have been able to settle on the best queen for his kingdom.

When we make choices, sometimes we act like King Ahashverosh, and set ourselves up for endless aggravation. At other times we act more wisely like Eliezer, and limit our choices and our decision making process in ways that increase our satisfaction.  

Writing about decision making, in his book, The Paradox of Choice- Why Less Is More, economist Barry Schwartz makes real-life suggestions that sometimes seem counter-intuitive, but which, to a surprising degree, are congruent with basic Jewish teachings.

For example, Schwartz notes that people are better off when they pay less attention to what others around them are doing and don’t compare themselves to other people. We know that in Judaism as “thou shalt not covet”. In that regard the Talmud tells a simple story about a dog who has secured a meaty bone and is heading back home to enjoy it. On his way he crosses over a bridge. Looking down at the water he sees another dog carrying another bone in its mouth. He pauses to look more carefully. Is that bone better than his bone? He growls to test his counterpart, how hard will it be to get that other, better bone, and sure enough that other dog growls back at him. I’m sure you can guess the end of the story, an example of the negative outcomes that can follow comparison shopping.

Schwartz also finds that people are happier if they accept voluntary constraints on their freedom that actually limit rather than expand their choices.  He writes: “When people have no choice, life is unbearable. But as the number of available choices increase…choice no longer liberates, but debilitates. It might even be said to tyrannize.” To avoid the bad decisions, anxiety, stress, dissatisfaction and even clinical depression that “clinging to every choice can produce”; he advises us to decide which choices really matter and to rely on customs and norms to make some choices automatic. Isn’t that the end result of the traditional system of mitzvot, limiting some choices and carving out of a domain within which choices are made? In this regard it is interesting to think about the traditional understanding of the balance of negative and positive commandments in Judaism. According to tradition there are 365 negative commandments but only 248 positive commandments. This is not because there is an inherent negativity in the commandments, but because positive commandments are more constraining, while negative commandments allow for a scope of action. The Kashrut laws are mostly negative commandments. They limit our choices in some ways but still leave a domain within which we have lots of freedom. Excluding pork and shellfish and the mixing of milk and meat, there are still a large variety of foods we can eat and ways that they can be prepared. On Monday night at our Sisterhood meeting, we talked about traditional Judaism taking a similar approach to sexuality. Again our tradition includes many negative commandments, but within the sphere of what is permitted, there is a surprising amount of freedom allowed.

With regard to the really important decisions in our lives, Schwartz notes that we are better off if we view them as nonreversible, that is, as covenantal commitments. Finding a life partner, he writes, “ is not a matter of comparison shopping and trading up.” Knowing we are not in the market, actually increases our happiness and peace of mind. Similarly, our other commitments-- to our parents and to our children, to our friends and to the communities to which we belong, to our religious heritage, are also more meaningful to us, if we do not view them as coming with exchange policies.

Finally, Schwartz notes that if we make the choice to cultivate gratitude, we will increase our wellbeing. Every experience has both “delightful and disappointing aspects”. As we make decisions, we can focus on the ways in which we think that by choosing one thing we are missing out on other things, that is on all the roads not taken. Or we can instead focus on the ways in which our choices have lead to lives that are much better than they might have been. He notes that a focus on gratitude does not come automatically to most people, but that when it is learned as a new habit, it makes all the good things in life even better. Our rabbis made a similar suggestion in advising us to find 100 things each day for which to recite a blessing. These prayers remind us to take a moment to feel gratitude for even the simple recurring blessings of our lives, like opening our eyes in the morning, finding the strength to greet the day, and enjoying the simple foods that sustain us. Gratitude isn’t something American society focuses on every day, nor may it be easy for everyone in this stressful and scary economic climate, but top economists and Jewish tradition, agree- it couldn’t hurt. As we prepare for Thanksgiving this week, let us include thankfulness as a real part of our celebration.