Action vs. Inaction

As a college student in my early twenties I am presented with many choices. In this every day world that I live in, I exercise option. These choices represent themselves as soon as I rise out of bed. The question is whether I will hit the snooze button or jump out of bed, eat Raisin Bran or K special, Strawberries or Bananas, Coffee or tea. With every choice there is a consequence, good or bad. More or less, I habitually make my decision on whether I will regret my inaction. For example, I rise out of bed it's half past 7 and immediately it dawns on me that I am going to be late to work. I stop for a split second and think "do I have enough time to eat breakfast or can I make it until lunch?" My inaction of not eating breakfast would not only mean I would be a cranky employee but it might also affect my work. Hence, I do not dare to skip breakfast.

As one makes a decision we begin to rationalize why we made the decision we made. We begin to explain things in a manner that might not be right or wrong but just for peace of mind. Daniel Gilbert further explains the concept of explaining and rationalizing our actions or inaction's in his written essay named "Immune to Reality". In this essay, Gilbert argues that our psychological immune system will do anything in its power to protect oneself. Our psychological immune system fights off any negative emotions. This system fights any negative events and defends our ego.

Gilbert's argument is formulated throughout his essay by his use of logical reasoning. Throughout "Immune to Reality," Gilbert uses studies to assert his argument. For instance, Gilbert writes, "...College students volunteered for a study in which they believed they were interacting in an online chat room with students from other Universities. In fact, they were actually interacting with a sophisticated computer program that simulated the presence of other students." The author uses several facts and statistics to emphasize his argument and prove