Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely

Nonfiction

Most people believe that humans are rational beings who can be relied on to make correct and healthy decisions if given sufficient information. However, research suggests that people aren’t as rational as previously assumed and can actually make irrational decisions that they later regret. Dan Ariely’s book Predictably Irrational examines this phenomenon and proposes ways that businesses and the government can help people make rational decisions. This raises the interesting question of how much the government should help people make rational decisions. Yes, people should be able to make irrational decisions, but it shouldn’t be because they are being influenced by businesses with big advertisement budgets and a team of psychologists. The government isn’t hurting the economy by helping its citizens, instead they are leveling the playing field to make the market fairer for everyone.

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho

Fiction

I really tried to like this book and I had heard a lot of good things about it. In an interview with the New York Times even Malala Yousafzai had said that it was her favorite book. As in Malala Yousafzai, winner of the Nobel Prize. Despite all this, frankly I was sort of disappointed.

            The Alchemist is about a boy named Santiago who leaves his life as a shepherd to try to look for treasure at the urging of a king. Through his journey, Santiago learns the importance of following one’s “Personal Legend.” Coelho talks about one’s “Personal Legend” a lot in the book which he describes as what one’s soul was meant to do. While traveling, Santiago finds a beautiful woman named Fatima. Santiago is tempted to stay with Fatima and stop looking for his treasure, but he eventually decides that he will go and come back for her, because not even love should stop him. Fatima contradicts Coelho’s belief in everyone having a “Personal Legend.” Fatima doesn’t seem to have a “Personal Legend” because the only thing she does during The Alchemist is wait for Santiago to fulfill his “Personal Legend” or she urges him to fulfill his “Personal Legend.” Fatima’s only purpose in the book is to serve Santiago so either that means that 1.) her Personal Legend is to serve Santiago or 2.) she hasn’t realized her Personal Legend yet. Both of these interpretations are problematic and the “woman as muse” or “woman as stay-at-home help meet” are familiar - and terribly annoying -- stereotypes.

If it is scenario 1.) her Personal Legend is to serve Santiago, Coelho contributes to a sexist belief that women were made to serve the men in their lives. This idea takes away Fatima’s autonomy as a person and her ability to make decisions for herself. Given that Fatima is one of the very few women in the novel (the other two being “Baker’s Daughter” and “Tricky Gypsy”), this means that Coelho is implicitly saying that women should be given a sort of second class status without their own personal struggles. But let’s say for the sake of argument that Coelho didn’t mean for Fatima’s “Personal Legend” to be to serve Santiago or for Fatima to be an individual at all.  Maybe he meant for them to be a metaphor for love or devotion so that Fatima-Santiago are actually mirror images of each other and one could just have easily been the other (i.e. Fatima could be the one on the quest and Santiago would be waiting at home for her to return).  That seem far-fetched and it also seems like a less than ideal version of a love story.

If it is scenario 2.) she hasn’t realized her “Personal Legend” yet, Santiago is really exploiting their relationship. Santiago knows how important it is for one to discover his “Personal Legend”, but he doesn’t urge Fatima to find hers like she urges him. Santiago doesn’t support Fatima in the ways that she supported him.  On the contrary, he keeps her dependent on him, waiting for him to return so that she is essentially trapped and even less likely to find her “Personal Legend.”

I realize the book is supposed to be an inspiring fable but the tired old gender stereotypes kept me from appreciating it the way apparently millions of others did.  Go figure.

The Crucible

The Crucible by Arthur Miller

Miller’s The Crucible speaks to a society where narrow mindedness and provincial thinking clouds vision. The Crucible takes place in 1600s where Abigail Williams accuses multiple women in the town of Salem of witchcraft. The judges in the town support Abigail for all of her accusations and blindly accept what she says merely because she says that her word is trustworthy. 

Miller’s book speaks directly to McCarthyism, but the message still holds true today. In an era of social media, it is all too easy to only listen to what one wants to hear. Just like how Judge Danforth only saw the evidence to help him find witches and how McCarthy only saw the evidence to help him find Communists, people can cherry pick the information that supports their point of view. When Facebook finds news articles that a person might be interested in, it isn’t looking for the most credible piece of information, it is looking for what the user wants to see based on previous preferences. Facebook’s current solution for fighting fake news is to tag questionable pieces in order to provide context. However, the mere-exposure effect shows that simply reading the headline plants that seed of false information. Individuals can’t get their news from just social media. They need to make sure that their news comes from credible and respected sources to get all types of information, not just the ones that users are exposed to through their friends.

Tenth of December

Tenth of December by George Saunders

Fiction

Saunders’s collection of ten short stories in Tenth of December creatively and hilariously explore the cracks in humanity that are exposed under stress. None of George Saunders’s stories are very pleasant and most don’t even have a happy ending. His characters are pushed through difficult conflicts that test their empathy or devotion to their values. But through these trials the readers get a deeper glimpse at what makes us human, and what Saunders seems to be saying is that humans are naïve romantics. Saunders’s characters are idealists in a society that seems to very rarely reward idealists. Sometimes what the reader sees is reassuring, but most of the time I felt disgusted with either our flaws or how society is set up to dismiss virtue.