Dec 20 2009: What puzzles me is that so many people criticize the talk as being anti-choice. Because in my understanding that point isn't actually made. It's rather a talk against the simplified idea that more choice automatically means more freedom and hence a better life.
Barry Schwartz own answer to the question "Is having more choice a good thing or a bad thing?" is "...yes" it's both. And he continues "We all know what's good about it, so I'm going to talk about what's bad about it." So by nature of this purpose his argument is quite unbalanced as he solely focuses on the downside of more choice. But at least his evidence in this direction is plausible and scientifically grounded.
I personally think, his point is to challenge the commonplace oversimplification that more choice is the one and only solution, often found in political and economical debates. A point I consider worth keeping in mind.
Dec 20 2009: The contradiction you mention does not exist in the original argument. Because neither does Barry Schwartz argue that doing the right thing is encouraged by being not allowed to, nor does he state that a job description should include a list of social interactions expected from the job holder. What he says is different: First, he argues that janitors do the right thing in spite being actually expected to do so. That is different from: They do so because the are expected not to. Second, Barry Schwartz recommends to create environments which give people the chance to apply moral skill and moral will on their own judgment. That again is different from your interpretation: It doesn't mean to include certain "moral tasks" into their respective job description (that would be like teaching "bath" based on a script). He recommends to grant people some leeway, to trust in them that they will do the right thing when needed.
Play
TEDCred score: +2.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Talk: Barry Schwartz: The paradox of choice
Barry Schwartz own answer to the question "Is having more choice a good thing or a bad thing?" is "...yes" it's both. And he continues "We all know what's good about it, so I'm going to talk about what's bad about it." So by nature of this purpose his argument is quite unbalanced as he solely focuses on the downside of more choice. But at least his evidence in this direction is plausible and scientifically grounded.
I personally think, his point is to challenge the commonplace oversimplification that more choice is the one and only solution, often found in political and economical debates. A point I consider worth keeping in mind.
A reply on Talk: Barry Schwartz: Our loss of wisdom