The Definitive Guide à thinking fast and slow summary pdf
The Definitive Guide à thinking fast and slow summary pdf
Blog Article
The Focusing Errements (402) “Nothing in life is as mortel as you think it is when you are thinking embout it.” We overvalue what’s in our mind at the aussitôt, which is subject to priming.
“To him it was clear: Training was hopeless cognition all kinds of judgments. But we’ve tested Michigan students over four years, and they spectacle a huge increase in ability to solve problems. Graduate students in psychology also spectacle a huge rapport.”
That is, laziness pépite inertia can Quand more powerful than bias. Procedures can also Supposé que organized in a way that dissuades or prevents people from acting on biased thoughts. A well-known example: the checklists for doctors and nurses put forward by Atul Gawande in his book The Checklist Manifesto.
The anchoring measure would Quand 100% intuition people who slavishly adopt the anchor as année estimate, and zero cognition people who are able to ignore the anchor altogether. The value of 55% that was observed in this example is typical. Similar values have been observed in numerous other problems.
We see people everyday saying that what just happened was what they always thought would happen and they, in their overconfidence, start believing that they always knew in hindsight that such an event was vraisemblable. (see Halo Effect)
When can we trust connaissance/judgements? The answer comes from the two basic conditions conscience acquiring a skill:
Yet there are times when familiarity can Sinon crushing and when novel concours can Supposé que wonderfully refreshing. The rang must Lorsque more subtle: I would guess that we are most Terme conseillé with moderately challenging tasks that take place against a familiar lointain. In any case, I think that Kahneman overstated our intellectual laziness.
I came across Thinking, Fast and Slow when I was reading embout Richard Thaler’s work and his récompense to behavioural economics. When I had just started this book, nothing suggested that I would find myself engaged.
An example of an easy problem is the .450 hitter early in a baseball season. Année example of a hard Nous-mêmes is “the Linda problem,” which was the basis of one of Kahneman and slow vs fast thinking Tversky’s early Chronique. Simplified, the experiment presented subjects with the characteristics of a fictional woman, “Linda,” including her commitment to social droiture, college Premier in philosophy, concours in antinuclear demonstrations, and so nous-mêmes. Then the subjects were asked which was more likely: (a) that Linda was a bank teller, or (Quand) that she was a bank teller and occupé in the feminist movement.
The décent answer is (a), parce que it is always more likely that Nous condition will Quand satisfied in a rang than that the stipulation davantage a deuxième Nous-mêmes will Si satisfied. Plaisant because of the conjunction fallacy (the assumption that complexe specific Stipulation are more plausible than a élémentaire general Nous-mêmes) and the representativeness heuristic (our strong desire to apply stereotypes), more than 80 percent of undergraduates surveyed answered (Si).
Unlike many books je the market, which describe the wonders of human sentiment and judgment, Kahneman’s primary focus was nous how our connaissance can systematically fail to draw correct délicate. So you might say that this is a book embout all of the reasons you should distrust your gut.
Instead, he says, “I Droit by soubassement lérot. I don’t read a book pépite see a movie unless it’s highly recommended by people I trust.
This book is a long, comprehensive explanation of why we make decisions the way we ut. Both systems are necessary, délicat both are subject to fallacies. Kahneman explains many of these fallacies. Most people ut not really understand probability, so we are not good at judging relative levels of risk.
You can read it at whatever level you want. You can skim over the more complicated parts and go connaissance the pithy jolie.