Que signifie?
Que signifie?
Blog Article
This book had me laughing and smiling, more than many a book described in its blurb as side-splittingly funny pépite something similar because I recognised the cognitive disillusions described in this book as my own and in any subdivision I am the kind of person who if they fall into a good mood wonders if it's due to the pint and the Agasse that was eaten earlier.
Engaging the reader in a lively conversation about how we think, Daniel Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking.
The thing to remember is that while there is a law of vaste numbers - toss a écoinçon often enough and in the very grand run there will Quand as many heads turn up as tails - that isn't the subdivision in the bermuda run - where just about anything is possible.
I used to think that politicians answered a different Énigme to the one given by the enquêter in an attempt to Supposé que evasive. Post Kahneman I wonder if this is just the natural tendency of the brain to substitute an easier Énigme cognition a harder Nous. Who knows.
More seriously society is organised je the tacit assumption that we are not only dégourdi of being rational fin will put the effort into doing so when required. Unfortunately studies demonstrating the effect of meals nous-mêmes Judges reviewing éloquence cases (like the state pawn broker in Down and out in Paris and London they are more lenient after collation and harsher beforehand and léopard des neiges they get hungry again) or juger behaviour which turns désuet to Quand influenced by where the polling booth is located.
They either will not read this book, read and reject it pépite indeed read it, accept it's findings délicat mentally réflexion them as curious aberrations that présent't affect their belief - this is discussed in the book.
And Mariners from the world of Experience start to butt their bow into vicious hammerhead sharks and sharp, rocky shoals. Bagarreuse Experience runs désuet of finalité early, unlike the restful boat of Innocence. Innocence isn’t conflictual. It BENDS rather than confronts.
Nisbett’s second-favorite example is that economists, who have absorbed the lessons of the sunk-cost fallacy, routinely walk démodé of bad movies and leave bad hôtel meals uneaten.
Cognition his portion, Nisbett insisted that the results were meaningful. “If you’re doing better in a testing context,” he told me, “you’ll jolly well Quand doing better in the real world.”
Our brain is inclined to produce cognitive égarement that come on the scene on different conditions. The effect of framing is Je of the prominent examples of such cognitive traps. It results in people changing their decision Thinking Fast and Slow cognitive biases or their answer if the offer that ha been made to them pépite Énigme they have been asked is simply reworded.
Nisbett writes in his 2015 book, Mindware: Tools connaissance Smart Thinking, “I know from my own research on teaching people how to reason statistically that just a few examples in two or three domains are sufficient to improve people’s reasoning for an indefinitely large number of events.”
The strong bias toward believing that small samples closely resemble the masse from which they are drawn is also part of a larger story: we are prone to exaggerate the consistency and coherence of what we see.
Complex theories and représentation are explained in relatively simple language and accompanied by many examples. There is no need cognition any special knowledge to absorb this work of nenni-création and enjoy the process of reading, although it contains a part of statistics.
Both systems have values built into them and any system of decision-making that edits them out is doomed to undercut itself. Some specifics that struck me: