Satisfied is Good: How to Become a Non-Complicated Person?
Satisfied is Good: How to Become a Non-Complicated Person?
1. The principle of satisfaction is the first principle of a happy life.
2. In this era, we face a frustrating paradox: the more choices we have, the harder it becomes to choose.
3. Instead of exhausting our lives in pursuit of the possibly existing "best," we should learn to accept the "good enough" that is right in front of us. It is not worth sacrificing the "good enough" for the pursuit of the "best."
4. True wisdom lies not in making perfect choices, but in making satisfactory decisions under limited conditions.
5. Sometimes, the most important decisions in life are not about what you do, but about what you decide not to do in a timely manner.
6. As stated in the Dao De Jing: "Knowing contentment avoids disgrace; knowing when to stop avoids danger; this can lead to long-lasting peace." — Understanding satisfaction and moderation is essential for lasting peace.
7. "Satisfied is good" does not mean "lack of ambition," but rather finding the most suitable solution for oneself within limited rationality and realistic resources.
8. Thinking from the bottom up about basic standards of satisfaction in life is often more reliable than setting higher standards from the top down, and may even yield better results.
9. Not every opportunity needs to be seized, and not every choice is worth exhausting yourself over. Sometimes, saying "that's good enough" is precisely the most rational choice.
10. In life, being satisfied is good.
---
I am Lao Yu, and welcome to the "Decision-Making Algorithms" class.
Recently, while organizing my room, I found many childhood doodles and crafts from my kids in the bookshelf drawer that I couldn't bear to throw away, so I planned to store them in a box.
I first checked Costco's website for storage boxes made of kraft paper; surprisingly, each one costs 5-6 Canadian dollars, with a set of 10 being too expensive—almost on par with plastic storage boxes. I then took a look at Amazon, where a similar brand offered a set of 12 with varying sizes; after comparing them horizontally, I realized they were different dimensions... Before I knew it, half an hour had passed.
I suddenly realized that I had fallen into the "online shopping dilemma." I just wanted to buy a set of paper boxes as a memory capsule for my children's growth. The purpose of shopping was to complete this task, not to find the highest cost-performance ratio box. Although these paper boxes are relatively expensive, their absolute value isn't high, and since they aren't something I buy often, it's really not worth spending so much time on.
Does this kind of small dilemma in life sound familiar?
Indeed, we face countless decisions every day: what to eat for breakfast, which takeout to order for lunch, whether to compare prices when buying clothes online.
Research shows that an adult makes hundreds of conscious decisions daily, about one-third of which are related to food. If we add those small, semi-automated decisions, the number becomes even more staggering. With such a burden of decision-making, it's no wonder we feel exhausted.
The more information channels and choices available, the more complicated it becomes: on one hand, there’s worry about missing out on better options; on the other hand, searching too long leads to fatigue and hesitation.
Worse yet, the more complicated it gets, the harder it becomes to make decisions. A well-known decision-making laboratory found that when we shop online, the more pages we browse through, the harder it becomes to make purchase decisions and the higher the probability of regret.
This is somewhat akin to what is said in Go: "Long thinking leads to bad moves." It means that thinking too long while playing leads to making terrible mistakes.
In life, even a small choice can consume us for hours or even days; under the triple pressure of information overload, comparison anxiety, and decision fatigue, you and I have become "complicated people" in decision-making dilemmas.
How can we break free from this complication?
In modern society, we often take "rational decision-making" for granted and even believe that as long as we gather complete information and comprehensively compare pros and cons, we can find so-called "optimal solutions."
However, this assumption based on "complete rationality" is actually a beautiful but unrealistic fantasy. Think about it: how many people can truly calculate all possibilities instantly like a supercomputer without missing any evaluations? Not to mention that information is often incomplete in reality; some data may be vague or simply non-existent.
Nobel laureate Herbert A. Simon pointed out that real decision-making is often constrained by time, cognition, and resources; “bounded rationality” is our norm.
In other words, humans are not completely rational; due to limitations in cognitive capacity, people will select decisions that best meet current conditions based on limited experience. Thus, the ultimate goal of human decision-making is not rational optimization but rather finding satisfactory solutions under bounded rationality.
The so-called "satisficing principle" means that once options reach our pre-set passing line, we can stop searching without needing to struggle for better cost-performance ratios or more perfect options.
Why might "satisfied is good" be more rational? Because when information is infinite, if one exhaustively searches all options and calculates absolute optimal solutions, search costs often far exceed the value of making a decision itself.
Just like I mentioned earlier about buying storage boxes: does spending half an hour looking for the "best" paper box really save more than just spending 5 minutes finding one that's "good enough"? No.
Because more often than not, what we should be looking for isn't “the lowest price online” or “the perfect option,” but rather “something that's good enough and makes us comfortable.” This reflects what the satisficing principle brings us—a practical perspective—and represents a crucial step for modern people moving from "complication" to "ease."
Simon’s satisficing principle sounds simple enough; so why can't we implement it? Because we lack a clear decision-making system.
Today, I will teach you a three-step method to help you become a “non-complicated person.”
1. Set Standards;
2. Control References;
3. Dare to Decide.
Let’s look at each step one by one.
Step One: Set Standards
What does your “satisfaction” really mean?
We often struggle because we follow trends or pursue what others deem good while neglecting that determining whether something is worth choosing starts with clarifying our own standards.
This is like Warren Buffett's idea of an “internal scorecard”: your satisfaction should be your own decision. Don’t dance with market trends; establish personal standards and adopt longer-term and more intrinsic thinking patterns.
A decision-making system uses a clear structure to help us wisely and efficiently achieve our goals and fulfill tasks required by decisions. Below is the ABC decision structure for this step:
a. Set Satisfaction Standards: Think about what are your baseline requirements—what must be done or purchased—and what are desirable extras that would be nice to have.
b. Define Time/Energy Budget: Decide how much time you will spend searching and how many options you will compare; do not exceed this range.
c. Evaluate Across Three Dimensions: Results, Process, Psychology.
- Results Dimension (Necessary Conditions): For example when buying a house—prioritize minimum area requirements within budget and location.
- Process Dimension (Decision Costs): Such as time spent, energy expended, and money spent.
- Psychological Dimension (Internal Feelings): Whether you feel anxious about this matter or if it aligns with your inner values.
Based on these satisfaction standards and evaluation methods above, you can roughly score your choices—at least passable but without needing perfectionist high scores.
This approach helps you avoid getting caught up in seeking something better while also allowing you to objectively recognize that “I have found a decent option.”
Taking my example of buying paper boxes again: my basic requirement was that they should be large enough and not unattractive since once filled they would surely end up stacked in some corner; thus selecting one with decent ratings would suffice—quickly resolve it!
As stated in Dao De Jing: “Knowing contentment avoids disgrace; knowing when to stop avoids danger; this leads to lasting peace.” This means understanding satisfaction prevents humiliation while recognizing moderation avoids peril—this way one can achieve lasting peace.
From my own life experience perspective—thinking from bottom up about basic satisfaction standards tends to be more reliable than top-down higher standards—even resulting in better outcomes sometimes.
For instance in investment finance—setting basic satisfaction at “aiming for returns above principal protection” might end up outperforming grand goals like “tenfold returns over ten years.”
Step Two: Control References
Don’t let comparisons ruin your good mood.
The second common mistake we make is comparing ourselves with others or allowing external standards to endlessly raise expectations.
When you see friends or influencers buying better or cheaper items than yours—you start doubting whether your choice was good enough—falling into “reference point dependence.”
Economist Daniel Kahneman discovered an interesting phenomenon: our judgments about things often depend not on their absolute value but rather on reference points.
For example: if an item costs 100 yuan few people will buy it; however if it's marked down from 200 yuan to 100 yuan suddenly many feel it's worth buying.
Even more absurdly—if your salary increases by 1 thousand yuan initially you're happy but then hearing colleague Xiao Wang got an increase of 1 thousand five—you immediately feel down again!
This illustrates “reference point dependence”: we always rely on some “anchor point” for judgment regarding gains or losses. This anchor could be:
- Original price vs current price;
- Other people's choices vs your own;
- Ideal state vs reality situation.
Once trapped by reference point dependence—we tend to:
- Overly concern ourselves with others’ choices;
- Be easily influenced by marketing tactics;
- Judge ourselves using inappropriate standards.
Speaking of step two—I want to share my friend’s car-buying experience. He chooses suitable models from reputable brands based on his needs and budget then buys basic versions with safety features equivalent to top models—the so-called “base model.”
He says one major pitfall when buying cars comes from initially eyeing models priced at 300 thousand only then seeing adding just over 10 thousand gets you luxury versions—so he upgrades! Then upon seeing limited editions looking even more tempting adding just another 20 thousand—he upgrades again! After going back-and-forth he ends up driving home with a car costing 400 thousand!
My friend's principle before entering any dealership was choosing suitable models beforehand—only considering base models regardless of sales pitches claiming “this model offers greater value”—thus avoiding falling into comparison traps altogether!
Next comes ABC decision structure for controlling references:
a. Reduce External Distractions: Try blocking out temptations from social media friends or influencers’ ads—focus on your genuine needs.
b. Filter Irrelevant Comparisons: Be wary of unrelated “better” cases—avoid using others’ choices as your standard.
c. Return To Self Expectations: Bring decisions back within your established “satisfaction line”—don’t let noise artificially raise or lower reference points!
Step Three: Dare To Decide
Use the 37% rule to say goodbye to indecision!
Even after setting standards and controlling external comparisons some people still get stuck at last step—not daring enough to take action!
At this point—the 37% rule comes into play!
This rule has strict mathematical proof backing it up—it primarily addresses when one should stop searching and make decisions applicable across job hunting housing purchases partner selection etcetera!
The essence of this rule maximizes probability for selecting optimal solutions while avoiding endless waiting!
Combining with 37% rule—the ABC decision structure for daring decisions becomes:
a. Set Observation Period First: In first 37% options or timeframe use only for market understanding—not rushing into finalizing anything.
b. Act Immediately Upon Exceeding Standards: Once any subsequent option exceeds prior best standard—decide immediately without further hesitation!
c. Stop Searching After Decision Completion: After making decisions intentionally block out subsequent distractions otherwise risk falling back into regrets over “was there something better?”
Of course—not every decision suits application of 37% rule—but using algorithmic approaches allows quicker resolutions indeed makes things clearer!
For instance—I know a father who selects tutoring teachers for his child using very simple method—if three other parents say someone’s great he decides right there! The reasoning being from probability perspective three positive reviews are persuasive enough! Besides if unsuitable he can always look again later!
By following these three steps—set standards control references dare decide—you can greatly reduce internal friction freeing up energy focusing instead on what truly matters or where your strengths lie!
Set Standards: Don’t expect everything all at once clarify what matters most;
Control References: Escape pointless comparisons external distractions reduce competitiveness;
Dare To Decide: When timing calls act decisively—“good enough” surpasses lingering in perfect fantasies’ dilemma!
Remember：“Satisfied is good” does not mean lacking ambition—it enables finding best suited solutions within bounded rationality realistic resources! When you learn at appropriate moments saying “this suffices”—you’ll discover life can become much lighter while mindset grows broader!
Finally,
Charles Dickens wrote *David Copperfield*, an autobiographical novel featuring character Mr. Micawber—a childhood friend who faced debt issues—the character inspired by Dickens’ own father! In novel Micawber famously states:
“If annual income amounts twenty pounds while yearly expenditure totals nineteen pounds nineteen shillings six pence—that's happiness! If annual income amounts twenty pounds yet yearly expenditure totals twenty pounds six pence—that's poverty!”
What simple yet profound description indeed!
No wonder some say—the principle of satisfaction constitutes first principle towards happy living!
In today’s world—we encounter an unfortunate paradox: with increasing choices comes greater difficulty deciding!
Instead of exhausting ourselves pursuing potentially existing “best,” let’s learn accepting present-day “good enough.” It’s certainly unworthy sacrificing “good enough” chasing after elusive perfection! Because true wisdom lies not merely crafting flawless selections but rather making satisfactory determinations under constraints imposed by reality!
Sometimes—the most crucial choice during our lifetime may hinge less upon actions taken than timely resolutions regarding actions ceased altogether!
Remember—not every opportunity requires seizing nor every option merits exhaustive pursuit! At times simply declaring “that’s sufficient” proves most rational choice indeed!
In life being satisfied suffices!