By+Jenny+Coad

“The risk of a wrong decision is preferable to the terror of indecision，” said Maimonides.1 How right he was. Today， we are racked with choice， and decision-making has never been more fraught.2 Its hell.

Look at restaurant menus. Anything longer than a page is alarming. So much margin for error3. “Hold on a minute， I just need another look.”“Whats the special4， again？” Glance at a neighbouring table. “That looks nice， is it the lamb？” Turn to your partner. “What are you having？”

At least youve settled on a restaurant. Organising a dinner out generates endless back and forth between companions， jostling politely for position， lobbying for a venue in a more convenient postcode， suggesting somewhere a little less expensive or a touch more on trend：5“Ive heard this place is good”， “Thats quite far…” “OK. What about x or y？” “Maybe z？”

Part of the problem is technology. Were in touch with everyone all the time via our phones and all looped into the decision-making process， whether on email， text message or WhatsApp.6 As a result， decisions can be delayed until the day， the hour before and even en route7.

I met two friends in an empty restaurant the other day. They had drinks in front of them but the chooser of the restaurant was nervously shifting in her seat. “Should we go somewhere else？ Theres another place I read about up the road？” We hadnt even opened the menu. My friend clearly felt the burden of having made the call8. She didnt want to get it wrong—when the right thing could have been just around the corner.

Were constantly striving for perfection and its driving us to distraction9. Holidays present all sorts of headaches before youve even got to the airport. Budget withstanding10， the possibilities are endless. And we understandably place so much importance on our time away that the idea we might get it wrong fills us with dread.11 If its a special holiday， a honeymoon say， where do you begin？ One friend changed her honeymoon arrangements on the strength of12 negative online reviews. Another booked and cancelled a sunshine getaway within the space of 24 hours. He lost faith in his choice.

There are so many options at our fingertips. Endless people telling us what they thought of this or that on sites such as Trip-Advisor13—guaranteed to hinder not help， with its wildly ranging views on the same place. “Dont bother”， “We loved it”.endprint

I tormented myself on a recent holiday in Lisbon by looking at Instagram and all the tasty images of food from local restaurants in which I wasnt eating.14 There was always somewhere better gleaming tantalisingly on the horizon.15 We trawled the streets， pondering one place over another， popping back to one， having a quick drink somewhere else before deciding to go with this—or that.16

We can buy things， return them for a full refund and not worry about losing a few pounds on the postage. Weve even coined a term for it， shopping bulimia， where a sackful of purchases are made and swiftly returned.17 Two hits of dopamine， once for the splurge and once for the refund， phew.18

Deciding on a single career path or climbing the ranks in one company is now regarded as positively old-fashioned. These days you are expected to diversify. Try something else. Perhaps have multiple jobs—just look at George Osborne19. But is such flexibility making us any happier？ Im not sure. I wonder if instead we are permanently dissatisfied， always seeking the next thing. Constantly trying on slightly ill-fitting20 shoes.

That seems to be the case with dating. There are so many services， sites and apps that you can go on endlessly giving people a go. Anna Heaton， an attractive 29-yearold， has been in the news for having had 77 dates in two years. No one has yet measured up. Some might say shes picky21， others that she knows what she wants. Maybe she simply has a serious case of decision-fatigue22？

The American psychologist and philosopher William James believed there to be “no more miserable human being than one in whom nothing is habitual but indecision”.23 He would know. This was a man who changed his studies and career path multiple times， going from science to painting to natural history， followed up by medicine， then on to philosophy via psychology and physiology24.

Indecision is restless25， time-consuming， tiring. The trouble is that， increasingly， none of us know where we stand on anything.26

1. indecision： 優(yōu)柔寡斷，猶豫不決；Maimonides： 邁蒙尼提斯（1135—1204），中世紀(jì)猶太哲學(xué)家、醫(yī)生、神學(xué)家。

2. be racked with： 受……折磨；fraught：令人苦惱的，使人憂慮的。

3. margin for error：（不影響最終結(jié)果的）誤差幅度。

4. special： 特色菜。

5. 朋友間安排一次晚飯會引發(fā)一場無休止的討論，彼此間禮貌性地爭奪聚餐地點，勸別人選一個更方便的地點，再提議一個便宜點兒或是更受歡迎的地方。jostle for： 爭奪，搶占；lobby： v. 游說；a touch： 輕微，些許。

6. loop： 使繞成圈；WhatsApp： WhatsApp Messenger，一款通信應(yīng)用程序，類似于Wechat和Line。

7. en route：〈法〉在途中。

8. make the call： 做出決定。endprint

9. distraction： 心煩意亂。

10. withstand： 承受，禁得起。budget withstanding指“只要在預(yù)算范圍內(nèi)”。

11. 而且我們把出行看得如此重要（這可以理解），以至于特別害怕自己可能會安排得不好。dread： 懼怕，擔(dān)心。

12. on the strength of： 基于，憑借。

13. Trip-Advisor： 貓途鷹，全球領(lǐng)先的旅游網(wǎng)站。

14. torment： 折磨；Lisbon： 里斯本，葡萄牙首都。

15. gleam： 閃閃發(fā)光；tantalisingly：// 挑逗性地，撩人地。

16. 我們在街上到處搜羅，考慮完這家考慮那家，先趕回一家店，然后去另一家迅速喝上一杯，同時考慮好下一站再去哪兒吃。trawl： 搜羅，網(wǎng)羅；ponder： 考慮，沉思；pop： （突然或匆匆）去。

17. coin： 杜撰；bulimia： // 貪食癥；sackful： 一滿袋的量，指很多，大量。

18. dopamine： 多巴胺，一種神經(jīng)傳導(dǎo)物質(zhì)，與人的情欲和感覺相關(guān)，可傳遞興奮及開心的信息，也與各種上癮行為有關(guān)；splurge： 揮霍；phew： 咳，?。ū韰拹?、不安、煩躁、驚訝等）。

19. George Osborne： 喬治·奧斯本（1971— ），英國前財政大臣（2010—2016），目前身兼多職，除了下議院后座議員身份外，還在《倫敦旗幟晚報》擔(dān)任新聞編輯，并在全球最大資產(chǎn)管理公司美國貝萊德投資集團兼職當(dāng)顧問。

20. ill-fitting： 不合適的。

21. picky： 挑剔的。

22. decision-fatigue： 決策疲勞，指一個人在做了一長串的決策之后決策質(zhì)量開始下降的狀態(tài)。

23. 美國心理學(xué)家和哲學(xué)家威廉·詹姆斯認(rèn)為，“如果一個人除了猶豫不決之外沒有別的習(xí)慣，那么沒有誰比他更悲慘了。”

24. physiology： 生理學(xué)。

25. restless： 永無止境的。

26. 最要命的是，我們對于哪些東西應(yīng)該堅持越來越?jīng)]把握。

閱讀感評

∷秋葉 評

法國作家加繆（Albert Camus）曾告訴我們說：“生活即許多抉擇的總和（Life is the sum of choices）”。其實，每一個抉擇（choice）就意味著一次決策（decision-making），因為人一般無法同時走上兩條道路，必然要選擇一條，舍棄另一條（恰如美國詩人Robert Frost所謂的“the road not taken”）。不管是東方還是西方文化，傳統(tǒng)上均對于抉擇時的優(yōu)柔寡斷或猶豫不決持貶斥態(tài)度，甚至?xí)⒋藲w咎于決策者的性格缺陷。我們所崇尚的往往是抉擇時的一錘定音以及執(zhí)行時的堅決果斷、義無反顧，而這在當(dāng)前時代，由于選擇面的無限擴大以及眾聲喧嘩的影響，已顯得越來越艱難了。

在本人成長的上世紀(jì)七八十年代，不管是接受教育還是規(guī)劃未來，幾乎沒有什么可供自由選擇的機會，大致上是被安排包辦的。例如，高考被稱作是“千軍萬馬過獨木橋”，因為當(dāng)時的青年幾乎沒有什么其他的前途與出路。當(dāng)時的大學(xué)與招生數(shù)量都非常有限，屬于典型的精英教育模式?？忌荒茉诳荚嚭笄曳?jǐn)?shù)未公布前通過估分來報考若干所大學(xué)的志愿，一旦被其中一所錄取就無法選擇其他。大學(xué)畢業(yè)后，所有人都必須服從國家統(tǒng)一分配。因此，在那個年代，多種選擇屬奢侈品，決策權(quán)等同于特權(quán)，幾乎不會出現(xiàn)當(dāng)前有些人視選擇為負(fù)擔(dān)（choice overload），導(dǎo)致決策疲勞（decision-fatigue）的情形。

應(yīng)該說是因為時代進(jìn)步，我們迎來了人生中的更多選擇。然而，也許是屬于“幸福的苦惱”吧，隨之也帶來了不少煩惱。選擇多了，目不暇接，往往讓人眼花繚亂，分不清彼此，產(chǎn)生“此山望著彼山高”的幻覺。尤其是那些“止于至善”的男女，不管是在事業(yè)還是愛情上，都在“騎驢找馬”以致“永遠(yuǎn)在路上”。另外，由于通信手段的便捷以及社交媒體的普及，幾乎人人都參與到了決策之中，意見紛呈，無所適從，難以作出理性的分析與判斷。在我們這個時代，大家貌似都有自己鮮明的立場與獨特的想法，其實更容易為無所不在的他人意見與勸導(dǎo)所左右。于是便有了以下的原文作者之問：“Is such flexibility making us any happier？”（諸如此類的選擇多樣性讓我們更為幸福嗎？）作者沒有作出正面回答，但她顯然對此是趨于否定的。社交媒體上的各種意見往往是“成事不足、敗事有余”，人們總是處于不滿足狀態(tài)，永遠(yuǎn)在尋找“下一個”，難有決斷。球王貝利的最滿意進(jìn)球——“下一個”——曾是一時佳話，而像原文中所說的一位29歲魅力女性兩年相親77次尚在期待“下一個”就很可能只是個笑話了。

有效的決策要求決策人對于當(dāng)前的局面有個清晰的認(rèn)識，然后才能在多種可能性之間作出明智抉擇。心理學(xué)研究表明，過多決策將導(dǎo)致“決策疲勞”，即決策力下降。因此，一旦面臨多次決策，我們就要學(xué)會區(qū)分“輕重緩急”，須遵循的信條是：對于重大決策，要用邏輯與理性進(jìn)行慎重考慮、反復(fù)商討，而對于屬于生活細(xì)節(jié)的決定，須不假思索，快速應(yīng)對（Slow down for the major and speed up for the minus）。有專家把“決策（decision）”定義為“the end of deliberation and the

beginning of action（慎重考慮的終結(jié)與行動的開始）”。從上文可見，我們這個時代，往往讓前面一部分占據(jù)太大比重，讓自己沉浸甚至陶醉于收集相關(guān)信息與無休止的人際溝通中，卻不知何時該有個及時的了斷，以便更從容地投入到對于決策的執(zhí)行之中。原文說，我們的決策往往要拖延到行動的當(dāng)天、前一小時甚至在前往途中，這不啻為典型的虎頭蛇尾，而且還常常因外界的影響而臨時撤改。我們都清楚，不管是抉擇還是決策，須伴隨及時而堅決的行動（action，即我們現(xiàn)在常說的“執(zhí)行力”），否則恰如常言所說的“一個沒有計劃的目標(biāo)僅是個愿望”，同樣，一個沒有行動的決策顯然也僅僅屬于愿景，而且充其量是一種游移善變的愿景。endprint