TED Speaker

Aubrey de Grey: Aging and Overcoming Death

Editor’s Note: Dr. Aubrey de Grey is a true maverick. He challenges the most basic assumption underlying the human condition – that aging is inevitable. He argues instead that aging is a disease – one that can be cured if it’s approached as “an engineering problem.”

He is a biomedical gerontologist based in Cambridge, UK, and is the Chief Science Officer of SENS Foundation, a non-profit charity dedicated to combating the aging process. He is also Editor-in-Chief of Rejuvenation Research, the world’s only peer-reviewed journal focused on intervention in aging. His research interest encompass the causes of all cellular side-effects of metabolism (“damage”) that constitute mammalian aging and the design of interventions to repair and /or obviate that damage. You can read his full bio from here here here and here.

eTalk’s Niaz Uddin has interviewed Aubrey de Grey recently to gain insights about his ideas, research and works in the field of aging which is given below.

Niaz: Dear Aubrey, I know you are a very busy man and I really appreciate you for taking time out of your schedule to join me. We are very thrilled and honored to have you at eTalks.

Aubrey: My pleasure.

Niaz: At the beginning of our interview, could you please say a few words about your background and the positions that you hold today?

Aubrey: I was initially trained as a computer scientist, but I switched to the biology of aging at around 30 when I discovered, to my astonishment, that very few researchers were really working on doing anything about aging. Currently I’m the Chief Science Officer of SENS Research Foundation, a California-based biomedical research charity focused on developing the strategy for defeating aging that I proposed back in 2000.

Niaz: That’s really interesting. What did first attract you to the idea of physical immortality?

Aubrey: First, let’s be totally clear that I don’t work on “immortality”, or any variations on that theme. I work on health: I want to let people stay fully healthy, i.e. functioning both physically and mentally as well as a young adult, at any age. Once this is achieved, it is very likely that there will be a dramatic side-benefit in terms of how long people live – but that’s what it is, a side-benefit. I do not work on longevity for longevity’s sake. So, to answer what your question should have been: what attracted me to the crusade to bring aging under medical control was simply that it was obviously humanity’s worst problem but hardly anyone was working on it.

Niaz: What’s so wrong with getting old? Is getting old the biggest health crisis facing the world?

Aubrey: The way you phrase the question incorporates most of the answer. Most people have a totally distorted idea of what aging is: they think of it as distinct from the diseases of old age, and as something natural and inevitable, like the passage of time. So “getting old” is used pretty much interchangeably as either getting chronologically old or getting frail. WTF?! We don’t ask what’s so wrong with getting Alzheimer’s, so it makes no sense to ask what’s so wrong with going downhill in all ways.

Niaz: You’re a true maverick and you challenge the most basic assumption underlying the human condition — that aging is inevitable. You argue instead that aging is a disease – one that can be cured if it’s approached as “an engineering problem.” Before we focus on your efforts to understand the aging process, perhaps we should first say a few words about aging itself. Why do organisms age, and die?

Aubrey: Aging is far less mysterious than most people assume. In its essence, aging of a living organism is no different than aging of a simple, man-made machine – which should be no surprise, since after all the body is a machine (whatever one’s view may be as regards any non-physical elements that combine with the body to form the human being). Thus, it’s totally reasonable – I would say obvious, but apparently it isn’t obvious to everyone – to look at how we already succeed in extending the healthy longevity of cars or aeroplanes waaay beyond how long they were designed to last, and apply the same principles to human aging. And those principles come down, in a nutshell to just one idea: preventative maintenance, i.e. repairing pre-symptomatic damage before symptoms emerge.

Niaz: So does the process of aging serve some evolutionary purpose — and if it does, will we run into trouble if we attempt to counteract it?

Aubrey: It does not. From the 1880s or so until the 1950s it was thought that aging helped species to be more nimble in responding evolutionarily to changing environments, but then Medawar pointed out that mortality from causes that aren’t related to age is so high in the wild that there are too few frail individuals to drive natural selection for aging even if in principle it would be a good thing for the species. Medawar’s observation was somewhat over simplistic, but today almost all gerontologists agree that his basic idea was correct and that there are no “genes for aging”.

Niaz: You are the Chief Science Officer of the SENS Foundation. What that acronym stands for and what the organization does? 

Aubrey: Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence, but I know that’s a bit of a mouthful. We do biomedical research to develop regenerative medicine against aging, i.e rejuvenation biotechnology that will restore people’s physical and mental function (and appearance, yes!) to that of a young adult.

Niaz: What’s been the most striking piece of data to support your hypotheses?

Aubrey: That’s not really the right question: I don’t have a “hypothesis”. What I have is a technological plan – a proposal for how to manipulate an aspect of nature – whereas hypotheses are conjectures about how nature works in the absence of manipulation. The reason I need to make this ostensibly nit-picking distinction is that pioneering technology does not proceed by the accumulation of data: rather, it consists of a leap of faith that putting established technologies together will deliver more than the sum of the parts. So we (and others) have certainly been making great progress in developing the component technologies that will in due course combine to defeat aging, but calling those advances “support for a hypothesis” is a misuse of terms.

Niaz: As you know, now we are living in an exciting era of bioinformatics and big data. What do you think about the role of bioinformatics and big data in this field?

Aubrey: The relevance of big data to biomedical gerontology is pretty much the same as throughout biology. It speeds up a huge variety of bench experiments, but it doesn’t derive many big ideas itself.

Niaz: Some people regard aging research, and efforts to extend lifespan, with suspicion. Why do you think that is? What is your response to those concerns?

Aubrey: It’s embodied in your question: people who recoil at this work do so because they regard “aging research” and “efforts to extend lifespan” as synonymous, when in fact “aging research” and “efforts to eliminate age-related disease and disability” are synonymous. The tragedy is that this misconception is so entrenched: even though gerontoogists have been correcting this error since decades before I came along, but no one wants to hear it, probably mainly because they don’t want to get their hopes up. I think this is finally changing now, but I’m not slowin down my advocacy efforts.

Niaz: You regard cancer as the greatest potential threat to your longevity program, but couldn’t mutant viruses represent an even greater threat?

Aubrey: Viruses are a huge issue, but they are small (they don’t have many genes), whereas cancer has the entire human genome at its mutational disposal. Pandemics are a problem mainly because we aren’t putting enough money into vaccine development: if we can just get our priorities right, the chances of any pandemic really taking off are infinitesimal.

Niaz: What are the other key problems in aging research?

Aubrey: Well, basically most non-SENS research revolves around identifying simple interventions (drugs, genes, diet) that can in some harmonious unitary way slow aging down. I support such research, because it may in many cases make a dent in aging far sooner than SENS will – but its impact will be far less than what SENS will do once it exists. As such, the way to save the most lives and alleviate the most suffering is to pursue both approaches.

Niaz: One of the important consequences of successful SENS research is that we will no longer lose creative, inventive individuals and their priceless gifts to humanity. It will really be exciting. You have assigned $13 million dollars out if $16.5 million dollars that you inherited from your mom to SENS. In addition, you have dedicated your life, all your time and money to this mission. Do you think you’re going to be successful as well as going to find out the ways to overcome death? What is the timeframe?

Aubrey: As a researcher, I intrinsically accept that I don’t know whether my work will succeed, but I am sufficiently motivated by the knowledge that it MAY succeed. I don’t think of myself as a betting man, but in that sense I suppose I am. As for timeframes, I think there is a 50% (at least) chance that this research will get us to what I’ve called “longevity escape velocity” within 20-25 years.

Niaz: WOW! That’s going to be incredible. Can the planet cope with people living so long?

Aubrey: People are incredibly bad at understanding the influences of the trajrctory of global population and how it would be altered by the defeat of aging, which is why we are funding a very prestigious group in Denver to analyse it authoritatively. The short answer is yes, we believe that the planet can certainly cope, partly because the currently-observed falling fertility rates and rising age at childbirth will continue, but also becaue new technologies such as renewable energy and nuclear fusion will greatly increase the planet’s carrying capacity.

Niaz: Google’s CEO, Larry Page, said: “Illness and aging affect all our families. With some longer term, moonshot thinking around healthcare and biotechnology, I believe we can improve millions of lives.” And very recently Google has announced a new company called Calico that will focus on health and well-being, in particular the challenge of aging and associated diseases.  What do you think about this move by Google?

Aubrey: It’s the single best piece of news in all the time I’ve been working in this field. Even though Calico is taking its time to determine its research priorities, I’m very confident that it will make huge contributions to hastening the defeat of aging.

Niaz: Now, as the editor of the journal of rejuvenation, obviously you have a lot of information coming across your desk all the time. I was wondering is there any particular research that excites you at the moment?

Aubrey: I really don’t want to single anything out. SENS is a divide-and-conquer strategy, and all its strands are moving forward very promisingly.

Niaz: You are exceptionally well connected with other scientists. I have seen you at TEDMED 2012 Conference. About how many scientific conferences do you attend each year? What is your main means of becoming acquainted with other scientists?

Aubrey: I give about 50 talks a year, at conferences, universities and elsewhere. I meet scientists there, of course, but also by contacts based on reading publications. In that regard I’m no different than any other scientist.

Niaz: What are your goals for the next decade?

Aubrey: To become obsolete. My goal is that by 2020 or so there will be people involved in this mission who are much better than me at all the tasks I’m good at and that currently the mission relies on me to perform.

Niaz: Is there anything else you would like for readers of eTalks to know about your work?

Aubrey: The main thing I want to communicate is that shortage of funding is delaying the defeat of aging by many years. My current estimate is that we could be going about three times faster if funding were not limiting – and the tragedy is that even a ten-fold increase, to something like $100m per year (way under 1% of the NIH’s butget), would pretty much eliminate that slowdown. We have a solid plan, and we have the world’s best researchers waiting and eager to get on and implement. All we need is the resources to let them get on with it.

Niaz: Dear Aubrey, thanks a lot for giving us time and sharing us your invaluable ides. We are wishing you very good luck for your tremendous success. Please take very good care of yourself.

Aubrey: My pleasure. Many thanks for the invitation.

Ending Note: It’s been more than a decade since Dr. Aubrey de Grey has established the principles behind SENS. You can visit sens.org and look at the summary of the principles over there. Also, of course, Dr. Aubrey recommends you his book “Ending Aging” which covers the strategy in lots of detail.

_  _  _  _  ___  _  _  _  _

Further Reading:

1. Viktor Mayer-Schönberger on Big Data Revolution

2. Gerd Leonhard on Big Data and the Future of Media, Marketing and Technology

3. Ely Kahn on Big Data, Startup and Entrepreneurship

4. Brian Keegan on Big Data

5. danah boyd on Future of Technology and Social Media

6. Irving Wladawsky-Berger on Evolution of Technology and Innovation

7. Horace Dediu on Asymco, Apple and Future of Computing

8. James Allworth on Disruptive Innovation

9. James Kobielus on Big Data, Cognitive Computing and Future of Product

Derek Sivers: Entrepreneurship, CD Baby and Wood Egg

Editor’s Note: After making a living as a professional musician, Derek Sivers went looking for ways to sell his own CD online and ended up creating CD Baby, once the largest seller of independent music on the web with over $100M in sales for over 150,000 musician clients. In 2008, Derek sold CD Baby for $22M, giving the proceeds to a charitable trust for music education. Since 2008, Derek has traveled the world and stayed busy creating and nurturing creative endeavors, like Muckwork, where teams of efficient assistants help musicians do their “uncreative dirty work.” He is a frequent speaker at the TED Conference, with over 6 million views of his talks.

Sivers is also the author of ‘Anything You Want, which shot to #1 on all of its Amazon categories. His new company, Wood Egg, is publishing annual startup guides to 16 countries in Asia.

Derek writes regularly on creativity, entrepreneurship, and music on his blog: Sivers.org

To learn more about him, please read his amazing book ‘Anything you want, visit his official blog, read his Wikipedia Bio, watch his amazing TED Talks Weird, or just different?, How to start a movement, and Keep your goals to yourself.

You can also follow him on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn.

eTalk’s Niaz Uddin has interviewed Derek Sivers recently to gain insights about Entrepreneurship, CD Baby and Wood Egg which is given below.

Niaz: Dear Derek, thank you so much for joining us in the midst of your busy schedule. We are very thrilled and honored to have you at eTalks.

Derek: Thank you Niaz.

Niaz: You are a musician, programmer, writer and entrepreneur. You have founded CD Baby and MuckWork. You are also the author of an amazing book ‘Anything You Want’ which shot to #1 on all of its Amazon categories. In 2011, you have moved to Singapore and started your new company Wood Egg. At the beginning of our interview, can you please tell us about Wood Egg?

Derek: Starting five years ago, I got deeply curious about the differences between countries and cultures, fascinated with understanding the different perspectives. Two years ago, I moved to Singapore, and started visiting all the countries in Asia, asking dumb questions, making good friends.  But my learning felt too unstructured. So while walking around Yogyakarta, Indonesia, remembering “the best way to learn something is to teach it”, I came up with an ambitious plan. I decided to produce and publish 16 books per year on 16 countries in Asia: Cambodia, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. Knowing they wouldn’t be great at first, I committed to improving them every year for many years. After a few years of doing this, they should be pretty awesome.

Niaz: Can you please tell us why have you moved to Singapore? 

Derek: Really it’s just understanding a different point of view.  And not just visiting, but really living somewhere long enough so that it really feels like home.  We’re so surrounded by people who think like us that it’s impossible to see that what we think are universal truths are just our local culture.  We can’t see it until we get outside of it.

Niaz: What have you learned about the entrepreneurial environment of Asia? How is it different from other cultures?

Derek: I was born in California and grew up with what I felt was a normal upbringing with normal values.  I was speaking to a business school class here in Singapore. I asked, “How many people would like to start their own company some day?” In a room of 50 people, only one hand (reluctantly) went up. If I would have asked this question to a room of 50 business school students in California, 51 hands would have gone up!  Thinking maybe they were just shy, I asked, “Really!? Why not?” – and asked individuals. Their answers:  1. “Why take the risk? I just want security.” 2. “I spent all this money on school, and need to make it back.” 3. “If I fail, it would be a huge embarrassment to my family.”  Then I realized my local American culture. The land of entrepreneurs and over-confidence. I had heard this before, but I hadn’t really felt it until I could see it from a distance.

Niaz: What are the cultural challenges to build, operate and sustain next big organization like Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook or Twitter from Asia?

Derek: The sense of possibility.  When you live in New York City or Los Angeles, you see famous people around you all the time.  If you want to be famous, seeing those people next to you gives you the feeling that you’re very close to your dreams – you’re in the place where it can happen.  But if you’re living in Urugay or Estonia, you feel that you’re a world away from that kind of fame.  So once a few super-ambitious people have a big international success with a company out of Indonesia, for example, it will give huge encouragement to other people from Indonesia – to give them the feeling that they are so close – that they can do it.

Niaz: What are the necessary steps should be taken to overcome those challenges for making a welcoming, sustainable and supportive environment for entrepreneurs?

Derek: Just do what Singapore and Hong Kong are doing.  They’re doing everything right.  Mix in a little of India’s “jugaad” rule-breaking culture, for a real winning combination.

Niaz: We love to say about breaking the rules though it happens in reality very rarely. You are one of those few remarkable people who have broken so many rules for making things happen, specifically while working with CD Baby. You had a moment you describe in the book when all the MBAs and VCs were asking you “What’s your plan, what’s your growth rate, what are your projections?” And you basically said, “My focus is on helping the customers, and as long as we’re doing that, I don’t care about the projections.” Business Students invest Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars in Top Business School to learn planning, strategy, growth, leadership and setting goals. And you have build CD Baby and sold it for $22 Million where you have not literally cared about planning, forecasting, strategy, and even growth. Can you please tell us about the evolution and success story of CD Baby?

Derek: Ah, it would take about 88 pages to properly tell that story, but that’s why I wrote “Anything You Want”.

Niaz: Can you please briefly tell us about ‘Anything You Want’?

Derek: It’s only 88 pages, a $4 purchase on Amazon, can be read in under an hour, and really tells the tale from beginning to end of starting CD Baby, growing it beyond my wildest dreams, the mistakes I made along the way, then selling it for $22 million, as you said.  It’s distilled down to “40 Lessons for a New Kind of Entrepreneur”, as the publisher put it.  I’m not just telling my story, but looking back, found some important and usable lessons that you can apply to your own business.

Niaz: Now StartUp means finding an idea, taking seed funding, inviting angel investors and ending up taking fund from Venture Capital. It’s really a very complex cycle. I know it has two sides like a coin. In one side it’s tough to get funding. In other side, it’s tough to get right funding and advisers. Vinod Khosla, one of the co-founders of Sun Microsystems who later went on to create Khosla Ventures, cited in Techcrunch Disrupt SF 2013, ‘95 percent of VCs add zero value. 70-80 percent add negative value to a startup in their advising’. As it’s the scenario, you have had a great and different story. You have done great job with CD Baby and made it a multi million dollars company without taking help from VC. How can an entrepreneur build multi million Dollars Company without taking help of VCs? Is it possible now? Can you please explain it for us?

Derek: I know less-than-nothing about investors, VCs, or any of that.  Never dealt with them.  Asking me how to make a company without them is like asking an Argentinian farmer how he grows his crops without the Empire State Building.  It’s just not a part of my world, so I don’t even know how to compare my approach to another.

Niaz: What are your secrets of taking initiatives and how do you stay confident on taking those risky and challenging initiatives?

Derek: I’ve never done anything that felt risky or even challenging.  When you’re on to something good, and you’re the right person to do it, it just feels like common sense, and quite obvious.  If it feels too risky, too challenging, maybe it’s an unwise venture or maybe you’re the wrong person to do it.

Niaz: Many people now believe that we have already solved all of our interesting problems. New StartUps and companies are also working on almost similar basis. By any chance, if someone is coming with a great idea, rest of the others are getting into it and ending up creating mess. Can you please tell us about how to find really big and interesting problems, working on it in the long run to solve those problems and ending up building next big organization?

Derek: You don’t need big problems or big organizations like you don’t need big passion.  A few times, I’ve been asked a question like, “But what if I haven’t found my true passion?” It’s dangerous to think in terms of “passion” and “purpose” because they sound like such huge overwhelming things.  If you think love needs to look like “Romeo and Juliet”, you’ll overlook a great relationship that grows slowly.  If you think you haven’t found your passion yet, you’re probably expecting it to be overwhelming.  Instead, just notice what excites you on a small moment-to-moment level.  If you find yourself diving into a book about Photoshop and playing around with the program for hours, go for it! Dive in deeper. Maybe that’s your new calling.  For me, CD Baby was just a curiosity: that little hobby that kept me up until 2am every night, programming and experimenting. It just grew from there.

Niaz: Based on your exciting entrepreneurial career and the lessons you have learned over the years, can you please list 10 advices for Startup Company to survive, to grow and to go global?

Derek: I can’t, because it’s different for everyone.  When someone shows me their business plan and asks what they should do, I say, “Well – who are you? What kind of life do you want? Easy? Challenging? Why are you doing this? Money? Impact? Love? To prove something to the high school bully?”  Businesses are not the same.  Business paths are not the same.  Motivations are not the same.  No list of 10 advices apply to everyone.  And I can’t separate business and people.  What you should be doing with your business depends on who you are as a person, not on the business itself.

Niaz: What excites me mostly about you is your Humanistic Perspective of Entrepreneurship. Can you please tell us about the humanistic perspective of entrepreneurship?

Derek: I don’t understand how the two are different or separated in any way.  It’s like asking about the humanistic perspective on marriage.  It’s 100% completely and thoroughly human.  What’s good for business?  What’s good for people!  What’s good for each customer?  What’s good for each person working there?  What’s good for the owner?  These are inseparable questions.

Niaz: Do you think humanistic perspective of entrepreneurship is seriously big thing that will help entrepreneurs to be more human to solve real big problems of this mother earth to make it a better place to live in?

Derek: No.  I don’t think that big.  But I’m glad you do.

Niaz: What’s the one last thing you want to tell us?

Derek: Don’t make your business like someone else’s business.  Don’t make your life like someone else’s life.  Ignore people who tell you what you should be doing because someone else did.  Your life, joys, and motivations are different than theirs.

Derek: Thank you so much for sharing us your invaluable ideas, knowledge and experience. We are wishing you very good luck for all of your upcoming endeavors.

Derek: Thanks Niaz.  I really appreciate it.  Sorry I don’t have very many answers.

_  _  _  _  ___  _  _  _  _

Five Inspiring Quotes By Derek Sivers:

#1

You grow (and thrive!) by doing what excites you and what scares you everyday, not by trying to find your passion.”

#2

Success comes from persistently improving and inventing, not from persistently pushing what’s not working”

#3

You can’t please everyone, so proudly exclude people”

#4

Anything you hate to do, someone else loves. So find that person and let him do it”

#5

If you really care about starting a movement, have the courage to follow and show others how to follow. And when you find a lone nut doing something great, have the guts to be the first one to stand up and join in”

_  _  _  _  ___  _  _  _  _

Further Reading:

1. Jeff Haden on Pursuing Excellence

2. Daniel Pink on To Sell is Human

3. Barry Schwartz on Wisdom and Happiness

4. Hugh Mac­Leod on Creativity and Art

5. Shaka Senghor on Writing My Wrongs

Barry Schwartz: Wisdom and Happiness

Editor’s Note: Barry Schwartz is one of the very few people who thinks Really Big. He is an American psychologist and Dorwin Cartwright Professor of Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania, where he has taught for thirty year. He spoke at TED Main Stage for three times. He has over 5 Millions Views on his three thoughtful, profound and impressive TED Talks: The paradox of choice, Our loss of wisdom and Using our practical wisdom.

He is the author of several outstanding books including: The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less, Practical Wisdom: The Right Way to Do the Right Thing and The Costs of Living. You can read his full bio from here, here and here.

eTalk’s Niaz Uddin has interviewed Barry Schwartz recently to gain his ideas and insights about Wisdom and Happiness which is given below.

Niaz: Dear Schwartz, thank you so much for joining us. We are honored and thrilled to have you at eTalks.

B. Schwartz: My pleasure, Niaz.

Niaz: In 2010, you along with Kenneth Sharpe have published a book called ‘Practical Wisdom’. You call practical wisdom the “Master Virtue”. At the beginning of our interview can you please tell us about practical wisdom?

B. Schwartz: I call it the master virtue because it helps us decide whether, how, and how much to display other virtues. For example, courage is the mean (Aristotle’s word) between cowardice and recklessness.  It takes wisdom to find the mean.  Honesty is a virtue and kindness is a virtue but sometimes we have to choose between them.  Wisdom is what enables us to do so.

Niaz: You’ve said in the past that we’ve lost practical wisdom. How and when did we lose it?

B. Schwartz: Wisdom has to be nurtured by giving people the opportunity to use their judgment, get feedback, and improve their judgment over time.  We have substituted rules for judgment.  As a result, people can do the same job for 30 years and have the same bad judgment after 30 years as they had when they started.

Niaz: Why do you think “The good news is you don’t need to be brilliant to be wise. The bad news is that without wisdom, brilliance isn’t enough.”?

B. Schwartz: Because it takes judgment to do the right thing in the complex social world.  Being brilliant does not mean that you have good judgment.

Niaz: Can you please tell us about how wisdom applies to happiness?

B. Schwartz: Here is how I think wisdom applies to happiness.  Two key determinants of happiness are meaningful, engaging work and close relations with other people.  I think wisdom is essential for both of these things.  If you are wise, your work is better and your social relations are better.

Niaz: Why does ‘the secret to happiness is low expectations’?

B. Schwartz: Because we evaluate what we get by comparing it to what we expected to get.  If our expectations are too high, we’ll be disappointed with even good results.

Niaz: I have one other major question. You said that what makes people happiest is close relationships, not having things, even though these relationships constrain our choices. But don’t relationships also expand our choices — in a superficial way, by people giving us information about movies to see, places to vacation, etc. — and also in a more profound way, by giving us a chance to experience the world through other eyes, and see other ways of viewing things?

B. Schwartz: You don’t need close relationships to get movie recommendations.  Close relationships imply mutual concern and obligation.  That constrains choices.

Niaz: And in terms of happiness, what is your word on decision making?

B. Schwartz: My word is that too many options can undermine happiness inducing paralysis, bad decisions and dissatisfaction with even good decision.  So also can having standards that are too high—always wanting the best.

Niaz: You say that rules are the enemy of moral skill. But many people are saying that the country’s current financial meltdown was caused by an absence of rules and regulations.

B. Schwartz: Yes.  We need rules. Absolutely. But anyone who thinks that the “right” rules will solve the problem of financial irresponsibility is kidding him or herself.

Niaz: As you know, modern times, technological innovation and western prosperity have enabled us to do just about anything we want. What is the downside?

B. Schwartz: First, now that we can do anything we want, we can’t figure out what we want to do.  Also, we adapt to good things we experience in life so that they stop feeling like good things and we look for even better things.

Niaz: In 2005, you have published ‘The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less’. What is the “paradox of choice”?

B. Schwartz: The paradox is that more choice should enhance our sense of freedom but for many it leads to paralysis.  The paradox is that lots of choice should enable us to make better choices and thus be more satisfied but it makes us less satisfied.

Niaz: In the NYT magazine, scientist Roy Baumeister talks about decision fatigue: His theory is that too many decisions wear us out and negatively affect our judgment.

B. Schwartz: Yes, and he’s correct.

Niaz: What’s the scope of the paradox of choice?

B. Schwartz: I don’t know, but I suspect it applies to everything.

Niaz: What about outside consumer goods?

B. Schwartz: Jobs, places to live, what to study, where to study, romantic attachments.  It operates in all of those domains as well.

Niaz: What happens as we become more, if not over-reliant on filters?

B. Schwartz: Relying on filters helps us solve the problem of too much choice.  Of course the filters have to be good ones.

Niaz: How far would you take your experiment before you offer, to quote Henry Ford, “any color, as long as it’s black”?

B. Schwartz: I would never do that.  Choice is good.  The trick is to figure out how much choice allows us to derive the benefits of choice without paying the price.

Niaz:  Do you think people in their 20s and 30s are having more problems than earlier generations in making some of these major life decisions — are putting off choosing a career, a mate — some of those really big decisions?

B. Schwartz: Yes.  Absolutely.

Niaz: Finally, how do you nurture people to do the right thing?

B. Schwartz: You do it by setting an example, by giving people a chance to use their judgment and by being there to catch them when they fall and help them improve their judgment.

Niaz: Thanks again for joining us and sharing your enlightening ideas and knowledge. We wish you good luck as well as we want your healthy and safe life. Take very good care.

B. Schwartz: You’re welcome Niaz.

_  _  _  _  ___  _  _  _  _

Further Reading:

1. Jeff Haden on Pursuing Excellence

2. Daniel Pink on To Sell is Human

3. Gautam Mukunda on Leadership

4. Derek Sivers on  Entrepreneurship, CD Baby and Wood Egg

5. Peter Klein on Entrepreneurship, Economics and Education

6. Naeem Zafar on Entrepreneurship for the Better World