What do you think?
Rate this book
Mindware: Tools for Smart Thinking
Learn how to think more effectively, at work and at home.
Many scientific and philosophical ideas are so powerful that they can be applied to our lives at home and work and school to help us think smarter and more effectively about our behaviour and the world around us. Surprisingly, many of these ideas remain unknown to most of us.
In Mindware, the world-renowned psychologist Richard Nisbett presents these ideas in clear and accessible detail, offering a tool kit for better thinking and wiser decisions. He has made a distinguished career of studying and teaching such powerful problem-solving concepts as the law of large numbers, statistical regression, cost-benefit analysis, sunk costs and opportunity costs, and causation and correlation, probing how best to teach others to use them effectively in their daily lives.
In this groundbreaking book, he shows that a course in a given field--statistics or economics, for example--often doesn't work as well as a few minutes of more practical instruction in analyzing everyday situations. Mindware shows how to reframe common problems in such a way that these powerful scientific and statistical concepts can be applied to them. The result is an enlightening and practical guide to the most powerful tools of reasoning ever developed--tools that can easily be used to make better professional, business and personal decisions.
Many scientific and philosophical ideas are so powerful that they can be applied to our lives at home and work and school to help us think smarter and more effectively about our behaviour and the world around us. Surprisingly, many of these ideas remain unknown to most of us.
In Mindware, the world-renowned psychologist Richard Nisbett presents these ideas in clear and accessible detail, offering a tool kit for better thinking and wiser decisions. He has made a distinguished career of studying and teaching such powerful problem-solving concepts as the law of large numbers, statistical regression, cost-benefit analysis, sunk costs and opportunity costs, and causation and correlation, probing how best to teach others to use them effectively in their daily lives.
In this groundbreaking book, he shows that a course in a given field--statistics or economics, for example--often doesn't work as well as a few minutes of more practical instruction in analyzing everyday situations. Mindware shows how to reframe common problems in such a way that these powerful scientific and statistical concepts can be applied to them. The result is an enlightening and practical guide to the most powerful tools of reasoning ever developed--tools that can easily be used to make better professional, business and personal decisions.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 2015
504 people are currently reading
5103 people want to read
About the author
Richard E. Nisbett
16 books89 followersRichard E. Nisbett is one of the world's most respected psychologists. His work focuses on issues in social psychology and cognitive science. He has received the Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions from the American Psychological Association and many other national and international awards. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and is a recipient of the John Simon Guggenheim Fellowship. His book The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently . . . and Why won the William James Award of the American Psychological Association. That book, as well as Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count and Mindware: Tools for Smart Thinking have been translated into multiple languages. His newest book is Thinking: A Memoir.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 174 reviews
September 10, 2018
Uninspiring, somehow. Maybe I've just read too much on behaviouristics but I sort of expected handy tools on mindware and I got things that have been retold many times over, elsewhere.
So far, a DNF. I might go back to this one and maybe make some shiny new discovery of the purported mindware, yet.
So far, a DNF. I might go back to this one and maybe make some shiny new discovery of the purported mindware, yet.
February 4, 2017
I read "Think Fast and Slow" last year, and thought it would be good to read Mindware to refresh my mind via a different angle. But I am a bit disappointed. I read the 1st half of the book, and skim through the rest of the book
The author has some good points. But in deed, it needs professional edits such that "normal" readers like me can get the points loud and straight.
I wouldn't recommend the book if you have read "Think Fast and Slow".
Notes I took:
Mindware - Tools for Smart Thinking (Richard E. Nisbett)
Introduction
• The mind is like a muscle in some ways but not all. Lifting pretty much everything will make you stronger. But thinking about anything in any way is not likely to make you smarter. Some concepts and rules you are trying to learn is useless and some are priceless.
• Two very different types of reasoning:
o Eastern habits of thought, Dialectical (辩证法)
o Western habits of thought, Logic
• Self-reports about motives and goals can be highly unreliable – not for reason of self-protection, but because so much of mental life is inaccessible – we have no direct access at all to our thought process.
• Inferential rules (推理) can be learned. We need to extend the reach of inferential rules to problems of everyday life. The key is learning how to frame events in such a way that the relevance of the principles to the solutions of particular problem can be applied.
Part I – Thinking about Thoughts
Schemas (模式)
• We have schemas for virtually everything we encounter. E.g. fancy restaurant (quiet, elegant décor, expensive). We depend on schemas for construal of the objects we encounter and the nature of the situation we are in.
• Schemas and Stereotypes affect our behavior and our judgements
• Bodily state impacts cognitive stream
o Judgement – 0% for parole if hearing takes place before lunch, 66% for parole if hearing takes place after lunch.
o Want someone to find you warm and cuddly? Hand them a cup of coffee to hold, and don’t by any means make that an iced coffee.
• Abraham Lincoln – I don’t like that man. I must get to know him better. To add, vary the circumstances of the encounters as much as possible.
• Framing can affect decisions that are literally a matter of death.
The Power of Situation
The failure to recognize the importance of contexts and situations and the consequent overestimation of the role of personal dispositions is, the most pervasive and consequential inferential mistake we make. – fundamental attribution error.
Social influence
• You are the average of the five people you spend the most time with. – Jim Rohn
• People perform more energetically not just when they are in competition with others but even when other people are merely observing.
• One of a parent’s most important and challenging roles is to make sure their acquaintances are likely to be good influences.
• Pay more attention to context. This will imporove the odds that you will correctly identify situational factors that are influencing your behavior and that of others.
• Realize that situaltional factors usually influence your behavior and that of others more than they seem to, whereas dispositional factors are usually less influenctial than they seem.
• Realize that other people think their behavior is more responsive to situational facors than you are inclined to think – and they are more likely to be right than you are.
Unconcious vs. Concious
• Don’t assume that you know why you think what you think or do what you do; don’t assume that other people’s accounts of their reasons or motives are any more likely to be right than are your accounts of your own reasons or motives.
• Don’t ever fail to take the advantage of the free labor of the unconscious mind.
o When is the right time to begin working on a term paper due the last day of class? Answer: the first day of class. So you have plenty of time letting your conscious mind making progress on a problem, and when you stuck, drop it and turn to your unconscious mind to solve it.
Part II – The Formerly Dismal Science
• Cost-benefits analysis
o When making a decision of minor importance, I have always found it advantageous to consider all the pros and cons. In vital matters, however…the decision should come from the unconscious, from somewhere within ourselves. It is important to be aware of the fact that the heart is also influenced by information. As I pointed out in the previous chapter, the unconscious needs all possible relevant information, and some of this information will be generated only by conscious processes. Consciously acquired information can then be added to unconscious information, and the unconscious will then calculate an answer that it delivers to the conscious mind. Do by all means perform your cost-benefit analysis for the decisions that really matter to you. And then throw it away.
• Sunk Cost
o The sunk cost principle says that only future benefits and costs should figure in your choices.
o The money you already paid for is long gone -it’s sunk- and you cannot get it back.
o The economist’s motto - Nothing (the cost that already incurred) that happened yesterday can be retrieved. No use crying over spilt milk.
o Don’t throw good money after bad, that bad money is sunk. The same applies to politician who urges continuing a war, putting more lives at risk – so that the fallen shall not have died in vain.
• Opportunity Cost
o An opportunity cost is defined as the cost of engaging in a given course of action, thereby losing the benefits of the next-best action.
o This principle holds where resources are limited and the chosen action precludes taking any other action.
o The cost is not the sum of the unchosen alternatives but just the best unchosen alternative.
o There’s no free lunch – Any action you take means you can’t take some other action that, upon reflection, you might prefer.
• Falling into the sunk cost trap always entails paying unnecessary opportunity costs.
• People who make explicit cost-benefit decisions and avoid sunk costs and opportunity costs are more successful.
• Loss Aversion (produce inertia)
o A great tendency to avoid giving up what we already have. Taking a sure loss versus a possible gain is painful.
o Sending people a 20 dollor voucher they can use for ticket purchase nets 70% more ticker sales than mailing them a letter with a promo code for a 20 dollor discount.
o Structuring decision – some ways of structuring decisions result in better outcome for individuals and for society than the other ways of structuring decisions. E.g. make what “choice” as the default choice, opt-in or opt-out.
• Incentive – When we try to inclufene the vehavior of others, we are too ready to think interms of conventional incentivies (carrots and sticks). Rather than pushing people or pulling people, try removing barriers and creting channels that make the most sensivle behavior the easiest option.
Part III – Coding, Counting, Correlation, and Causality
Dispersion and Regression
• The normal distribution is a mathematical abstraction, the number of eggs laid weekly by different hens, the number of erros per week in the manufacture of car transmissions, and the IQ test scores are all arrayed in something called a normal distribution, which is captured by the so-called bell-curve. No one knows why that’s the case; it just is.
• Observations of objects or events should often be thought of as samples of a population.
• The fundamental attribution error is primarily due to our tendency to ignore situational factors, but this is compounded by our failure to recognize that a brief exposure to a person constitutes a small sampe of a person’s behavior.
• Increasing sample size reduces error only if the sample is unbiased.
• The standard deviation is a handy measure of the dispersion of a continuous variable around the mean.
Correlation (Covariation) – Linked Up
• Accurate assessment of relationships can be remarkably difficult.
• If a person is prepared to see a given relationship, that relationship is likely to be seen even when it’s not in the data. If you are counterprepared to see a given relationship, you are likely to fail to see it even when it’s there.
• You cannot rely on your belief that there’a correlation between two variables unless the association is quite strong. You got to be systematic to get it right: observe, record, and calculate or your are just blowing smoke.
• The most effective way to avoid making unjustifiably strong inferences about someone’s personality is to remind yourself that a person’s behavior can only be consistent from one occasion to another if the context is the same.
• Be cautious and humble when you try to predict future trait-related behavior, remind yourself that you may be overgeneralizing unless sample of behavior is large and obtained in a variety of situations.
Part IV – Experiments
• Assumptions tend to be wrong. A/B testing is child-simple in principle: create a procedure you want to examine, generate a control condition, flip a coin to see who (or what) gets which treatment, and see what happens.
• Correlational designs are weak because the researcher hasn’t assigned the cases to their condition.
• The greater the number of the cases, the greater the likelihood you will find a real effect.
• Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA) examines the associations between an independent variable and a dependent variable, controlling for the association between the independent variable and other variables, as well as the association of those other varables with the dependent variable. The method can tell us about causality only if all possible causal influences have been identified and measured reliably and validly. In practice, these conditions are rarely met.
Part VI – Knowing the World
• Explanations should be kept simple. They should call on as few concepts as possible, defined as simple as possible. Effects that are the same should be explained by the same cause.
• Reductionism in the service of simplicity is a virture; reductionism for its own sake can be a vice.
The author has some good points. But in deed, it needs professional edits such that "normal" readers like me can get the points loud and straight.
I wouldn't recommend the book if you have read "Think Fast and Slow".
Notes I took:
Mindware - Tools for Smart Thinking (Richard E. Nisbett)
Introduction
• The mind is like a muscle in some ways but not all. Lifting pretty much everything will make you stronger. But thinking about anything in any way is not likely to make you smarter. Some concepts and rules you are trying to learn is useless and some are priceless.
• Two very different types of reasoning:
o Eastern habits of thought, Dialectical (辩证法)
o Western habits of thought, Logic
• Self-reports about motives and goals can be highly unreliable – not for reason of self-protection, but because so much of mental life is inaccessible – we have no direct access at all to our thought process.
• Inferential rules (推理) can be learned. We need to extend the reach of inferential rules to problems of everyday life. The key is learning how to frame events in such a way that the relevance of the principles to the solutions of particular problem can be applied.
Part I – Thinking about Thoughts
Schemas (模式)
• We have schemas for virtually everything we encounter. E.g. fancy restaurant (quiet, elegant décor, expensive). We depend on schemas for construal of the objects we encounter and the nature of the situation we are in.
• Schemas and Stereotypes affect our behavior and our judgements
• Bodily state impacts cognitive stream
o Judgement – 0% for parole if hearing takes place before lunch, 66% for parole if hearing takes place after lunch.
o Want someone to find you warm and cuddly? Hand them a cup of coffee to hold, and don’t by any means make that an iced coffee.
• Abraham Lincoln – I don’t like that man. I must get to know him better. To add, vary the circumstances of the encounters as much as possible.
• Framing can affect decisions that are literally a matter of death.
The Power of Situation
The failure to recognize the importance of contexts and situations and the consequent overestimation of the role of personal dispositions is, the most pervasive and consequential inferential mistake we make. – fundamental attribution error.
Social influence
• You are the average of the five people you spend the most time with. – Jim Rohn
• People perform more energetically not just when they are in competition with others but even when other people are merely observing.
• One of a parent’s most important and challenging roles is to make sure their acquaintances are likely to be good influences.
• Pay more attention to context. This will imporove the odds that you will correctly identify situational factors that are influencing your behavior and that of others.
• Realize that situaltional factors usually influence your behavior and that of others more than they seem to, whereas dispositional factors are usually less influenctial than they seem.
• Realize that other people think their behavior is more responsive to situational facors than you are inclined to think – and they are more likely to be right than you are.
Unconcious vs. Concious
• Don’t assume that you know why you think what you think or do what you do; don’t assume that other people’s accounts of their reasons or motives are any more likely to be right than are your accounts of your own reasons or motives.
• Don’t ever fail to take the advantage of the free labor of the unconscious mind.
o When is the right time to begin working on a term paper due the last day of class? Answer: the first day of class. So you have plenty of time letting your conscious mind making progress on a problem, and when you stuck, drop it and turn to your unconscious mind to solve it.
Part II – The Formerly Dismal Science
• Cost-benefits analysis
o When making a decision of minor importance, I have always found it advantageous to consider all the pros and cons. In vital matters, however…the decision should come from the unconscious, from somewhere within ourselves. It is important to be aware of the fact that the heart is also influenced by information. As I pointed out in the previous chapter, the unconscious needs all possible relevant information, and some of this information will be generated only by conscious processes. Consciously acquired information can then be added to unconscious information, and the unconscious will then calculate an answer that it delivers to the conscious mind. Do by all means perform your cost-benefit analysis for the decisions that really matter to you. And then throw it away.
• Sunk Cost
o The sunk cost principle says that only future benefits and costs should figure in your choices.
o The money you already paid for is long gone -it’s sunk- and you cannot get it back.
o The economist’s motto - Nothing (the cost that already incurred) that happened yesterday can be retrieved. No use crying over spilt milk.
o Don’t throw good money after bad, that bad money is sunk. The same applies to politician who urges continuing a war, putting more lives at risk – so that the fallen shall not have died in vain.
• Opportunity Cost
o An opportunity cost is defined as the cost of engaging in a given course of action, thereby losing the benefits of the next-best action.
o This principle holds where resources are limited and the chosen action precludes taking any other action.
o The cost is not the sum of the unchosen alternatives but just the best unchosen alternative.
o There’s no free lunch – Any action you take means you can’t take some other action that, upon reflection, you might prefer.
• Falling into the sunk cost trap always entails paying unnecessary opportunity costs.
• People who make explicit cost-benefit decisions and avoid sunk costs and opportunity costs are more successful.
• Loss Aversion (produce inertia)
o A great tendency to avoid giving up what we already have. Taking a sure loss versus a possible gain is painful.
o Sending people a 20 dollor voucher they can use for ticket purchase nets 70% more ticker sales than mailing them a letter with a promo code for a 20 dollor discount.
o Structuring decision – some ways of structuring decisions result in better outcome for individuals and for society than the other ways of structuring decisions. E.g. make what “choice” as the default choice, opt-in or opt-out.
• Incentive – When we try to inclufene the vehavior of others, we are too ready to think interms of conventional incentivies (carrots and sticks). Rather than pushing people or pulling people, try removing barriers and creting channels that make the most sensivle behavior the easiest option.
Part III – Coding, Counting, Correlation, and Causality
Dispersion and Regression
• The normal distribution is a mathematical abstraction, the number of eggs laid weekly by different hens, the number of erros per week in the manufacture of car transmissions, and the IQ test scores are all arrayed in something called a normal distribution, which is captured by the so-called bell-curve. No one knows why that’s the case; it just is.
• Observations of objects or events should often be thought of as samples of a population.
• The fundamental attribution error is primarily due to our tendency to ignore situational factors, but this is compounded by our failure to recognize that a brief exposure to a person constitutes a small sampe of a person’s behavior.
• Increasing sample size reduces error only if the sample is unbiased.
• The standard deviation is a handy measure of the dispersion of a continuous variable around the mean.
Correlation (Covariation) – Linked Up
• Accurate assessment of relationships can be remarkably difficult.
• If a person is prepared to see a given relationship, that relationship is likely to be seen even when it’s not in the data. If you are counterprepared to see a given relationship, you are likely to fail to see it even when it’s there.
• You cannot rely on your belief that there’a correlation between two variables unless the association is quite strong. You got to be systematic to get it right: observe, record, and calculate or your are just blowing smoke.
• The most effective way to avoid making unjustifiably strong inferences about someone’s personality is to remind yourself that a person’s behavior can only be consistent from one occasion to another if the context is the same.
• Be cautious and humble when you try to predict future trait-related behavior, remind yourself that you may be overgeneralizing unless sample of behavior is large and obtained in a variety of situations.
Part IV – Experiments
• Assumptions tend to be wrong. A/B testing is child-simple in principle: create a procedure you want to examine, generate a control condition, flip a coin to see who (or what) gets which treatment, and see what happens.
• Correlational designs are weak because the researcher hasn’t assigned the cases to their condition.
• The greater the number of the cases, the greater the likelihood you will find a real effect.
• Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA) examines the associations between an independent variable and a dependent variable, controlling for the association between the independent variable and other variables, as well as the association of those other varables with the dependent variable. The method can tell us about causality only if all possible causal influences have been identified and measured reliably and validly. In practice, these conditions are rarely met.
Part VI – Knowing the World
• Explanations should be kept simple. They should call on as few concepts as possible, defined as simple as possible. Effects that are the same should be explained by the same cause.
• Reductionism in the service of simplicity is a virture; reductionism for its own sake can be a vice.
August 22, 2015
There's no doubt that Richard Nisbett's book, subtitled 'tools for smart thinking' is great, despite two issues. I want to get those issues out of the way first before we get onto the good stuff, with which it is packed. One issue is the writing style. This is a touch clumsy and could do with a little professional help. Nisbett has a tendency to overuse unnecessary jargon in sentences like this:
Our construal of objects and events is influenced not just by the schemas that are activated in particular contexts, but by the framing of judgments we have to make.
Nor ideally worded. The second issue I suspect comes more from the publisher, which is the attempt to frame this book (sorry, couldn't resist the italics) as a self-help title as much as popular science. It doesn't work particularly well as a practical self-help toolkit - it's not structured in a way to make this a good use, particularly because a large part of the book is focused on how we get things wrong, rather than how to do things better.
But what makes this book a pure delight is the way that it analyses our human take on the world and shows the flaws in the typical ways that we think which, if overcome, would enable us to make better decisions. Some of this is fairly theoretical, starting with the nature of inference and exploring the holes in the Popperian disdain for inference, but there's also an exploration of the results of a plethora of experiments which take everyday decisions and situations and try to understand what is happening.
One great example is over the analytic input of the subconscious. Nisbett shows us how the old saw about leaving a problem overnight to reach a better decision really works. He describes an experiment where different people are shown a range of apartments and asked to decide which is 'best'. (As always with psychology experiments, there is room for questioning here as 'best' is so subjective with accommodation, but the experimenters try their best using a series of criteria against which each apartment is scored.) The subjects are divided into three groups. Some have to make an almost instant decision, others are allowed to weigh up the pros and cons, while a third group doesn't actually think about the problem but makes their decision after sleeping on it. By far the best results come from the third group, while the 'instant' decision maker are as effective as those weighing up the options. This neatly takes the wind out of the usual moan that people make a decision about house buying far too quickly. The subconscious can do a surprising amount of the heavy lifting for us (though, as Nisbett points out, it's hopeless at doing sums).
A very interesting section for those who are fans of Freakonomics and its successor books is where Nisbett tears apart a technique often used in the 'Freak' decision process - multiple regression analysis, where the idea is to analyse data by correcting for various unwanted variables, leaving the one being studied dominant. Nisbett, tongue in cheek, refers to it as 'eekonomics'. It's an infamously poor approach (the reason why cohort studies on diet etc. are so difficult to use), because it's almost impossible to be sure you've allowed for all the variables, and the impact of some can be little more than guesswork. Instead, Nisbett suggests, it would be much better to do far more experimental work in these fields, with proper double blind controls, even though he admits that's not always possible.
With other sections on correlation versus causality, sample sizes, the nature of logic and dialectic, and more, there's plenty of meat here in a truly fascinating read about the nature of human decision making, where it goes wrong and how (at least in principle) we could do it better. It's not always big stuff. He points out how we often fail to deal with the way that money we've spent is already written off. There's no point carrying on with something you are now getting no value out of due to changing circumstances, or a bad initial decision, just because you've already spent a lot on it. Yet we all tend to do it (as do governments).
The part contrasting 'Western' logic with 'Eastern' dialectic towards the end of the book is probably the least satisfactory as it doesn't really explain how the dialectic approach can produce specific useful results rather than fuzzy statements, but it's still interesting. Overall, an ideal book for anyone who raises an eyebrow at statistics in the press. If, for example, you are a fan of Radio 4's More or Less, this book takes the whole look at the way we make informed decisions using numbers to a new level.
Our construal of objects and events is influenced not just by the schemas that are activated in particular contexts, but by the framing of judgments we have to make.
Nor ideally worded. The second issue I suspect comes more from the publisher, which is the attempt to frame this book (sorry, couldn't resist the italics) as a self-help title as much as popular science. It doesn't work particularly well as a practical self-help toolkit - it's not structured in a way to make this a good use, particularly because a large part of the book is focused on how we get things wrong, rather than how to do things better.
But what makes this book a pure delight is the way that it analyses our human take on the world and shows the flaws in the typical ways that we think which, if overcome, would enable us to make better decisions. Some of this is fairly theoretical, starting with the nature of inference and exploring the holes in the Popperian disdain for inference, but there's also an exploration of the results of a plethora of experiments which take everyday decisions and situations and try to understand what is happening.
One great example is over the analytic input of the subconscious. Nisbett shows us how the old saw about leaving a problem overnight to reach a better decision really works. He describes an experiment where different people are shown a range of apartments and asked to decide which is 'best'. (As always with psychology experiments, there is room for questioning here as 'best' is so subjective with accommodation, but the experimenters try their best using a series of criteria against which each apartment is scored.) The subjects are divided into three groups. Some have to make an almost instant decision, others are allowed to weigh up the pros and cons, while a third group doesn't actually think about the problem but makes their decision after sleeping on it. By far the best results come from the third group, while the 'instant' decision maker are as effective as those weighing up the options. This neatly takes the wind out of the usual moan that people make a decision about house buying far too quickly. The subconscious can do a surprising amount of the heavy lifting for us (though, as Nisbett points out, it's hopeless at doing sums).
A very interesting section for those who are fans of Freakonomics and its successor books is where Nisbett tears apart a technique often used in the 'Freak' decision process - multiple regression analysis, where the idea is to analyse data by correcting for various unwanted variables, leaving the one being studied dominant. Nisbett, tongue in cheek, refers to it as 'eekonomics'. It's an infamously poor approach (the reason why cohort studies on diet etc. are so difficult to use), because it's almost impossible to be sure you've allowed for all the variables, and the impact of some can be little more than guesswork. Instead, Nisbett suggests, it would be much better to do far more experimental work in these fields, with proper double blind controls, even though he admits that's not always possible.
With other sections on correlation versus causality, sample sizes, the nature of logic and dialectic, and more, there's plenty of meat here in a truly fascinating read about the nature of human decision making, where it goes wrong and how (at least in principle) we could do it better. It's not always big stuff. He points out how we often fail to deal with the way that money we've spent is already written off. There's no point carrying on with something you are now getting no value out of due to changing circumstances, or a bad initial decision, just because you've already spent a lot on it. Yet we all tend to do it (as do governments).
The part contrasting 'Western' logic with 'Eastern' dialectic towards the end of the book is probably the least satisfactory as it doesn't really explain how the dialectic approach can produce specific useful results rather than fuzzy statements, but it's still interesting. Overall, an ideal book for anyone who raises an eyebrow at statistics in the press. If, for example, you are a fan of Radio 4's More or Less, this book takes the whole look at the way we make informed decisions using numbers to a new level.
August 18, 2016
If you've been hiding under a rock the last 10 years and missed Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely or Freakonomics by Steven Levitt or Switch by Chip Heath then Mindware might interest you. I didn't find anything new here but books about critical thinking should never be dismissed. The world needs them too much.
September 13, 2015
Disappointed. My favorite author Malcolm Gladwell endorsed this book therefore I automatically bought it. Human behavior is one of my favorite topics, but somehow this author found the way to make it boring. Lots of redundant examples and technical word choices made this a painful read.
August 14, 2016
One of the many books trying to teach rationality, some sense of statistics, avoiding logical fallacies. Can't hurt to read one of those now and then. Overall, the well-know things; in the end of the book the writer goes a bit overboard with trying to find some western-thought/eastern-thought syncretism, without too much evidence for it.
Not a bad read, but, to paraphrase Churchill, the good stuff wasn't very original, and the original stuff wasn't very good.
Not a bad read, but, to paraphrase Churchill, the good stuff wasn't very original, and the original stuff wasn't very good.
September 22, 2015
I guess I missed the "tools" aspect as per the title of this book...
February 2, 2017
The information here is generally interesting and I enjoyed numerous nuggets of debunking. But I can't give this book a great review because some of his points are logically and factually wrong. For example, he confuses stock market volatility with risk of loss, ignoring the evidence and expert advice from Warren Buffett.
Most disappointingly, his overall conclusion is a mess. He tells us to trust the consensus of experts. This defeats the purpose of the book, which is to teach the reader how to do "smart thinking." It also self-contradicts the preceding chapter on scientific revolutions where he explains how all the experts can be wrong. In his defense, he admits multiple times that it's very difficult to do "smart thinking" and that he fails at it frequently. Too bad for the reader.
Most disappointingly, his overall conclusion is a mess. He tells us to trust the consensus of experts. This defeats the purpose of the book, which is to teach the reader how to do "smart thinking." It also self-contradicts the preceding chapter on scientific revolutions where he explains how all the experts can be wrong. In his defense, he admits multiple times that it's very difficult to do "smart thinking" and that he fails at it frequently. Too bad for the reader.
March 4, 2021
O bună carte de psihologie scrisă pentru publicul larg, abordează idei ce apar și în Gândire rapidă, gândire lentă a lui Kahneman și Lebăda neagră a lui Taleb, inclusiv subiecte relevante din economie, statistică, logică aduse în realitatea vieții cu care ne confruntăm, ceea ce o face foarte utilă. Punctele în minus decurg poate din încercarea de a scrie pe înțelesul tuturor sau așa e stilul lui Nisbett (n-am mai citit altceva de el), însă n-am apreciat întotdeauna lejeritatea în exprimare (ba uneori neclaritatea fiindcă nu argumenta afirmația pe care o susține). Mi se pare, pe de altă parte, foarte important cum reușește să explice abordarea științifică și să sublinieze modurile în care poate fi implementată în viața cotidiană. Per total consider că e o lectură utilă pentru oricine, din care afli multe lucruri surprinzătoare (ex. diferențele în ceea ce privește logica, dintre Occident și Orientul îndepărtat), îți poate schimba perspectivele în câteva privințe.
Idei din carte: Factorii contextuali (stimuli irelevanți, accidentali), deși subconștienți, sunt adesea mai influenți decât factorii personali cum ar fi temperamentul, caracterul, preferințele, aptitudinile, planurile și motivele noastre. „Lucrurile care ne influențează judecățile și comportamentul ne sunt total necunoscute. Stimuli de care suntem doar parțial sau deloc conștienți ne afectează comportamentul în mod semnificativ. Deși ni se pare că avem acces la mecanismele noastre mentale, lucrurile nu stau deloc așa, de obicei. Suntem, însă, gata să venim cu explicații pentru comportament și judecîțile noastre, dar astfel de explicații sunt adesea incorecte.
Să nu presupuneți că știți de ce gândiți ceea ce gândiți sau faceți ceea ce faceți. Nu știm niciodată ce rol au avut în viața noastră anumiți factori incidentali, pe care i-am observat puțin sau pe care i-am uitat imediat.”
Subconștientul are o capacitate de percepție mult mai mare decât dimensiunea conștientă a minții.
Judecățile expuse în mod conștient ne pot induce în eroare pentru că rațiunea se concentrează mai ales asupra acelor trăsături care pot fi descrise verbal. Or, în mod obișnuit, acele trăsături reprezintă doar o parte dintre caracteristicile importante ale unui obiect. Spre deosebire de rațiune, subconștientul ia în considerare, în egală măsură, și ceea ce nu poate fi verbalizat și ceea ce poate fi verbalizat, așadar face alegeri mai bune.
Un comportament din trecut, observat în mai multe contexte diverse, este cel mai bun predictor pentru un comportament viitor.
Efectul social de facilitare - oamenii sunt mai plini de energie atunci când intră în competiție cu ceilalți și atunci când alți oameni îi observă.
Eroarea fundamentală de atribuire - comportamentul propriu îl explicăm accentuând influența contextului, pe când comportamentul celorlalți îl atribuim adesea factorilor personali (ca observatori, și nu ca actori, depunem mai puțin efort în observarea și analizarea factorilor implicați).
Tragedia bunurilor comune (mai mult pentru mine înseamnă mai puțin pentru ceilalți) - dacă îmi urmez propriul interes, la fel făcând și ceilalți, toți ajungem la faliment.
Principiul costului investit - costul din trecut (investiția) nu mai poate fi modificat (recuperat), de aceea contează doar beneficiile și costurile viitoare, nu și mărimea investiției (altfel se ajunge la cost+cost).
Costuri de oportunitate - costurile angajării într-o acțiune în urma căreia pierdem beneficiile unei acțiuni alternative.
Aversiune față de pierdere - resimțim mai pregnant emoții negative asociate cu pierderea decât intensitatea emoțiilor pozitive aduse de un câștig (bad is stronger than good).
Efectul de posesiune - apreciem un lucru în mod exagerat doar pentru că ne aparține.
Mai degrabă decât să-i împingeți pe oameni cu forța într-o direcție sau alta, încercați să dați la o parte barierele și să creați oportunități pentru ca un comportament rezonabil să reprezinte opțiunea cea mai ușoară.
Dacă o persoană e pregătită să vadă o relație între două elemente, atunci ea va vedea acea relație chiar dacă ea nu există. Dacă e pregătită să refuze să vadă o relație, atunci îi va fi imposibil să vadăă acea relație, chiar dacă aceasta există.
Un argument poate fi logic fără a fi în mod necesar și corect (adevărat).
Raționamentul dialectic nu reglementează gândirea, ci sugerează moduri de a rezolva contradicțiile, conflictele și schimbările; scopul e de ajunge la concluzii adevărate și folositoare, mai mult decât valide.
Schimbare, contradicție, holism, aceste principii sunt legate de încă o doctrină orientală, anume existența unei „căi de mijloc” între două poziții extreme. Se crede despre contradicții că sunt doar aparente.
Idei din carte: Factorii contextuali (stimuli irelevanți, accidentali), deși subconștienți, sunt adesea mai influenți decât factorii personali cum ar fi temperamentul, caracterul, preferințele, aptitudinile, planurile și motivele noastre. „Lucrurile care ne influențează judecățile și comportamentul ne sunt total necunoscute. Stimuli de care suntem doar parțial sau deloc conștienți ne afectează comportamentul în mod semnificativ. Deși ni se pare că avem acces la mecanismele noastre mentale, lucrurile nu stau deloc așa, de obicei. Suntem, însă, gata să venim cu explicații pentru comportament și judecîțile noastre, dar astfel de explicații sunt adesea incorecte.
Să nu presupuneți că știți de ce gândiți ceea ce gândiți sau faceți ceea ce faceți. Nu știm niciodată ce rol au avut în viața noastră anumiți factori incidentali, pe care i-am observat puțin sau pe care i-am uitat imediat.”
Subconștientul are o capacitate de percepție mult mai mare decât dimensiunea conștientă a minții.
Judecățile expuse în mod conștient ne pot induce în eroare pentru că rațiunea se concentrează mai ales asupra acelor trăsături care pot fi descrise verbal. Or, în mod obișnuit, acele trăsături reprezintă doar o parte dintre caracteristicile importante ale unui obiect. Spre deosebire de rațiune, subconștientul ia în considerare, în egală măsură, și ceea ce nu poate fi verbalizat și ceea ce poate fi verbalizat, așadar face alegeri mai bune.
Un comportament din trecut, observat în mai multe contexte diverse, este cel mai bun predictor pentru un comportament viitor.
Efectul social de facilitare - oamenii sunt mai plini de energie atunci când intră în competiție cu ceilalți și atunci când alți oameni îi observă.
Eroarea fundamentală de atribuire - comportamentul propriu îl explicăm accentuând influența contextului, pe când comportamentul celorlalți îl atribuim adesea factorilor personali (ca observatori, și nu ca actori, depunem mai puțin efort în observarea și analizarea factorilor implicați).
Tragedia bunurilor comune (mai mult pentru mine înseamnă mai puțin pentru ceilalți) - dacă îmi urmez propriul interes, la fel făcând și ceilalți, toți ajungem la faliment.
Principiul costului investit - costul din trecut (investiția) nu mai poate fi modificat (recuperat), de aceea contează doar beneficiile și costurile viitoare, nu și mărimea investiției (altfel se ajunge la cost+cost).
Costuri de oportunitate - costurile angajării într-o acțiune în urma căreia pierdem beneficiile unei acțiuni alternative.
Aversiune față de pierdere - resimțim mai pregnant emoții negative asociate cu pierderea decât intensitatea emoțiilor pozitive aduse de un câștig (bad is stronger than good).
Efectul de posesiune - apreciem un lucru în mod exagerat doar pentru că ne aparține.
Mai degrabă decât să-i împingeți pe oameni cu forța într-o direcție sau alta, încercați să dați la o parte barierele și să creați oportunități pentru ca un comportament rezonabil să reprezinte opțiunea cea mai ușoară.
Dacă o persoană e pregătită să vadă o relație între două elemente, atunci ea va vedea acea relație chiar dacă ea nu există. Dacă e pregătită să refuze să vadă o relație, atunci îi va fi imposibil să vadăă acea relație, chiar dacă aceasta există.
Un argument poate fi logic fără a fi în mod necesar și corect (adevărat).
Raționamentul dialectic nu reglementează gândirea, ci sugerează moduri de a rezolva contradicțiile, conflictele și schimbările; scopul e de ajunge la concluzii adevărate și folositoare, mai mult decât valide.
Schimbare, contradicție, holism, aceste principii sunt legate de încă o doctrină orientală, anume existența unei „căi de mijloc” între două poziții extreme. Se crede despre contradicții că sunt doar aparente.
August 27, 2020
Instructive, but boring.
September 8, 2015
It took me a while to read this book. I did it at 15 pages a day and that was doable. I had taught logic at a private high school and was interested in all Nisbett had to say. I was amazed at how easy it is to make mistakes in thinking, reasoning, and deciding. He has lots of ideas on how we can reason better. We are easily fooled by advertisements, the way they are constructed and the words used. I liked the way he identified how our thinking is influenced before he gave the tools to think in a better way. I liked his section on cost benefit analysis and loss aversion. I've done that with stocks myself. I was also very interested in his section about how the Chinese think differently than Westerners. I could never hold contradiction in my mind but they can. Something else from the book is that I will certainly be more hesitant about believing a statement that begins, "A recent study shows..." or "A recent survey indicates..."
This book is not a quick read and, unfortunately, those who probably need to read it the most will not.
This book is not a quick read and, unfortunately, those who probably need to read it the most will not.
February 15, 2020
Karar verme süreci oldukça farklı. Etkili düşünüp doğru karar vermek insanın elinde gibi görünse de dış faktörler karar sürecini çok fazla etkiliyor. Verilmiş kararlar hangi araçlar kullanılarak elde edilmiş olduğunu görmek bu kitap sayesinde mümkün. Oldukça fazla sayıda deney ve gözlem verilerek çok ufuk açıcı bilgiler mevcut. Doğu ile Batı kültürünün karar verme süreçleri. Deney olmadan bilim olmayacağı çok güzel şekilde istifade edilmiş.
August 22, 2016
This is the most 'meh' book I've read in a long time. It tries to say too much and just scratches the surface of the topics it talks about. Unless it's the first book you read about psychology, logic, economics, etc. i'd stay away from it, you'll learn nothing new from the book.
May 26, 2020
I read this book thanks to Blinkist.
The key message in this book:
Everyone wants to be rational, but there are common and invisible habits that prevent us from thinking objectively. By noticing such traps and defending ourselves against them, we can avoid irrationality and make logical choices.
Actionable Advice:
Use Occam's Razor to find the simplest solution.
Sometimes we’re faced with situations in which more than one theory is correct. How do you know which one to trust? Go with an approach named after Franciscan friar William of Ockham called Occam’s Razor. It goes like this: always pick the simplest theory. Why? Well, easier theories are easier to test and model mathematically. Plus, complicated theories rarely explain evidence as well as simple ones do.
Suggested further reading:
Drunk Tank Pink by Adam Alter
Drunk Tank Pink probes the hidden psychological and social influences that shape the way we see, think, feel, and act in the world.
The key message in this book:
Everyone wants to be rational, but there are common and invisible habits that prevent us from thinking objectively. By noticing such traps and defending ourselves against them, we can avoid irrationality and make logical choices.
Actionable Advice:
Use Occam's Razor to find the simplest solution.
Sometimes we’re faced with situations in which more than one theory is correct. How do you know which one to trust? Go with an approach named after Franciscan friar William of Ockham called Occam’s Razor. It goes like this: always pick the simplest theory. Why? Well, easier theories are easier to test and model mathematically. Plus, complicated theories rarely explain evidence as well as simple ones do.
Suggested further reading:
Drunk Tank Pink by Adam Alter
Drunk Tank Pink probes the hidden psychological and social influences that shape the way we see, think, feel, and act in the world.
May 1, 2018
То, что человек - он далеко не венец природы и совершенно не совершенное существо - нынче понятно, пожалуй, всем. А ведь этот мир - куда более сложный и непонятный, чем мы о нем думаем. И понимание этого мира подобным существом – тоже дело непростое. Человек - существо склонное ошибаться, практически во всем. Как говориться - «никому нельзя верить, даже себе». Но вот только большинство людей продолжают верить то, что уж они-то все прекрасно понимают. А ведь существует целые пласты информации в различных науках, которые утверждают совершенн�� обратное. Что можно и нужно сомневаться во всем.
Автор этой книги решил собрать практически все эти пласты из различных наук под одной обложкой. Просто чтобы далеко ходить не приходилось. Ведь обычно все они раскиданы по целому спектру наук. От строгой математики до очень субъективной психологии. Что такое эффект гало? Можно ли верить словам человека, который проводил телефонный опрос? Как правильно обработать информацию из разных источников? Все это можно найти в этой книге. Все разбито по главам, все собрано в одном месте.
Правда, стоит сразу сказать - если вы интересовались подобными вопросами - для вас тут не будет ничего нового. Это скорее такая компиляция из различных источников. Одна из удобных точек вхождения в историю понимания реальности. То есть, с помощью этой книги можно легко и быстро окинуть беглым взглядом большинство вещей, которые поджидают обычного человека на пути познания мира. Какие ошибки ждут его при осознании информации, стоит ли доверять собственным суждениям, надо ли перепроверять данные - вот это все.
Но, как и у большинства компиляций, у этой книги существует ряд недостатков. Например, не самое глубокое погружения в вопросы. Да, понятно, что, например, глубокого погружения в статистические методы от автора никто не ждет. Но ведь и многие психологические аспекты познания было неплохо осветить. А так, остается ощущение, что все это было написано в ускоренном темпе. Чтобы побыстрее перейти к следующему вопросу, не особо задерживаясь на каких-то деталях. Типа - поняли основные мысли? Хорошо, продолжаем разговор. Вот вам, если интересно, список литературы и ссылки на важные работы в этой области. Иногда даже казалось, что у автора слишком уж много информации, которую он желает запихать в одну книгу, даже если придется максимально уплотнять уже имеющуюся.
Еще один момент, который мне не понравился в этой книге - стиль письма. Да, написано все это достаточно емко, но у меня почему-то возникало ощущение, что автору очень уж хочется пошутить, но он не всегда знает, как бы это сделать. Поэтому, какие-то юмористические моменты, так и остались для меня загадкой. То есть у нас идет стена довольно серьезного текста, потом что-то похожее на шутку и опять стена серьезного текста. Чем ближе к концу, тем сильнее ощущается, что автор наконец-то набрался смелости - там шуток все больше и больше по сравнению с началом книги. Но повествования от этого получается довольно рыхлым и каким-то неровным. Читать как-то не очень комфортно. Через отдельные части приходилось буквально продираться. И это при том, что с большинством представленной информации я уже был знаком.
Так что, резюмируя - эта книга вполне себе неплохое руководство для тех, кто начинается задумываться о том, что же собой этот мир представляет, и как так получается, что «Предположения Обычно Оказываются Неверными» (это, кстати, основная мысль этой книги). Те, кто в курсе того, что такое репрезентативная выборка, принцип невозвратных издержек или как работает научный метод - здесь ничего нового не обнаружат. Ну разве что - почитать ради интереса. Понять, как все это можно объединить в одну сложную систему. Логично, что у вас не обязательно получится то, что получилось у автора. Но хотя бы первый шаг на пути к созданию собственного виденья мира, с помощью этой книги сделать можно.
Автор этой книги решил собрать практически все эти пласты из различных наук под одной обложкой. Просто чтобы далеко ходить не приходилось. Ведь обычно все они раскиданы по целому спектру наук. От строгой математики до очень субъективной психологии. Что такое эффект гало? Можно ли верить словам человека, который проводил телефонный опрос? Как правильно обработать информацию из разных источников? Все это можно найти в этой книге. Все разбито по главам, все собрано в одном месте.
Правда, стоит сразу сказать - если вы интересовались подобными вопросами - для вас тут не будет ничего нового. Это скорее такая компиляция из различных источников. Одна из удобных точек вхождения в историю понимания реальности. То есть, с помощью этой книги можно легко и быстро окинуть беглым взглядом большинство вещей, которые поджидают обычного человека на пути познания мира. Какие ошибки ждут его при осознании информации, стоит ли доверять собственным суждениям, надо ли перепроверять данные - вот это все.
Но, как и у большинства компиляций, у этой книги существует ряд недостатков. Например, не самое глубокое погружения в вопросы. Да, понятно, что, например, глубокого погружения в статистические методы от автора никто не ждет. Но ведь и многие психологические аспекты познания было неплохо осветить. А так, остается ощущение, что все это было написано в ускоренном темпе. Чтобы побыстрее перейти к следующему вопросу, не особо задерживаясь на каких-то деталях. Типа - поняли основные мысли? Хорошо, продолжаем разговор. Вот вам, если интересно, список литературы и ссылки на важные работы в этой области. Иногда даже казалось, что у автора слишком уж много информации, которую он желает запихать в одну книгу, даже если придется максимально уплотнять уже имеющуюся.
Еще один момент, который мне не понравился в этой книге - стиль письма. Да, написано все это достаточно емко, но у меня почему-то возникало ощущение, что автору очень уж хочется пошутить, но он не всегда знает, как бы это сделать. Поэтому, какие-то юмористические моменты, так и остались для меня загадкой. То есть у нас идет стена довольно серьезного текста, потом что-то похожее на шутку и опять стена серьезного текста. Чем ближе к концу, тем сильнее ощущается, что автор наконец-то набрался смелости - там шуток все больше и больше по сравнению с началом книги. Но повествования от этого получается довольно рыхлым и каким-то неровным. Читать как-то не очень комфортно. Через отдельные части приходилось буквально продираться. И это при том, что с большинством представленной информации я уже был знаком.
Так что, резюмируя - эта книга вполне себе неплохое руководство для тех, кто начинается задумываться о том, что же собой этот мир представляет, и как так получается, что «Предположения Обычно Оказываются Неверными» (это, кстати, основная мысль этой книги). Те, кто в курсе того, что такое репрезентативная выборка, принцип невозвратных издержек или как работает научный метод - здесь ничего нового не обнаружат. Ну разве что - почитать ради интереса. Понять, как все это можно объединить в одну сложную систему. Логично, что у вас не обязательно получится то, что получилось у автора. Но хотя бы первый шаг на пути к созданию собственного виденья мира, с помощью этой книги сделать можно.
March 6, 2016
I got interested in the author of this book upon viewing the Edge's feature on his "crusade against multiple regression analysis". This book delivers quite significantly on its title, and reflects the arguing style of the author fairly. And I tend to think this even having read it after Kahnemann's magnum opus, which came earlier and overlaps with the present to a good extent. "Thinking fast and slow" (referenced here) has more depth and is more ponderous in showcasing behavioral biases and heuristics of behavior under uncertainty and limited information. Yes Nisbett's combines a large survey of biases with an additional concern for intelligence and, importantly, with constant invitations to the reader in assimilating the reflections and tools that such biases illuminate and infer by contrast. Nisbett's style is also much more direct, straight to the point and operative so to say. He is as honest as Kahnemann in acknowledging that he is as prone as anyone to fall prey of biases and in disclosing that he himself systematically skips some of the advices, which for one makes the read not imposing. This is combined with additional observations on Nisbett's "geography of thought and intelligence", particularly when he compares logical and dialectical thinking, and wider views on the advancement of science as a social besides factual enterprise (and defending it from decostructivist and postmodernist positions). Besides, I find always quite refreshing just the possibility of being reminded of earlier reads from a different source. This is the case here as far as behavioral investigations are concerned.
So the reader has the opportunity to get exposed to representativity heuristics (which is used against most of Freud's unfalsifiable concoctions), the fundamental attributional error (where one can also see the difference in attitude between Western focus on personal traits and Eastern care for context and accidents); endowement effect / loss aversion / sunk cost effects (implied by prospect theory); social influence, choice architecture (nudging); opinions made up on the fly, priming / framing, the unreliability of personal narratives and the unaccessibility of mental processes (better judge from behavior than from statements); the rational way of the unconscious in making decisions (as it can handle simultaneously and compare much more information than the conscious); erroneous uses of statistics, and the infamous multiple regression analysis itself, whereby the author takes occasion to stifle even Levitt (of Freakonomics' fame) for misuse in a few of his works; the long lasting heritage of Greek focus on stasis (echoed in Einstein's belief in a static universe, for one) versus Chinese thought of continuous change, contradiction and wholeness; and how to trust experts who, though fallible, are nonetheless the best bets for reliable knowledge at any moment. The chapters end with short and handy summaries of take-home messages, to help pinpoint the wealth of material in nutshells (Kahnemann did the same, although in a different way to show how use the new terminology to imply in short a whole set of concepts).
Feynman used to say that "the first rule is: don't fool yourself". This book sustantiates how difficult it is not to do it, yet that thinking can also be thaught and improved by good practice.
So the reader has the opportunity to get exposed to representativity heuristics (which is used against most of Freud's unfalsifiable concoctions), the fundamental attributional error (where one can also see the difference in attitude between Western focus on personal traits and Eastern care for context and accidents); endowement effect / loss aversion / sunk cost effects (implied by prospect theory); social influence, choice architecture (nudging); opinions made up on the fly, priming / framing, the unreliability of personal narratives and the unaccessibility of mental processes (better judge from behavior than from statements); the rational way of the unconscious in making decisions (as it can handle simultaneously and compare much more information than the conscious); erroneous uses of statistics, and the infamous multiple regression analysis itself, whereby the author takes occasion to stifle even Levitt (of Freakonomics' fame) for misuse in a few of his works; the long lasting heritage of Greek focus on stasis (echoed in Einstein's belief in a static universe, for one) versus Chinese thought of continuous change, contradiction and wholeness; and how to trust experts who, though fallible, are nonetheless the best bets for reliable knowledge at any moment. The chapters end with short and handy summaries of take-home messages, to help pinpoint the wealth of material in nutshells (Kahnemann did the same, although in a different way to show how use the new terminology to imply in short a whole set of concepts).
Feynman used to say that "the first rule is: don't fool yourself". This book sustantiates how difficult it is not to do it, yet that thinking can also be thaught and improved by good practice.
October 8, 2019
Лучшие цитаты:
"Логика науки — это логика бизнеса и всей жизни. (Джон Стюарт Милль)"
"Следователи в Израиле обнаружили, что, если судья только что пообедал, подсудимого отпустят на поруки с вероятностью 66% 24 . Если же дело слушается прямо перед обедом, вероятность освобождения стремится к нулю."
Тренируй память, мозг и скорочтение. (промо)
"Истолкование нами явлений и событий зависит не только от схем, активизируемых в тех или иных контекстах, но и от фрейминга, то есть форматирования, подачи информации и определения рамок («обрамления») для выводов, которые мы делаем. Порядок, в котором подается информация, — это разновидность фрейминга."
"Подача информации имеет значение. И немалое."
"Эвристика цен убеждает нас, и в большинстве случаев справедливо: что дороже, то лучше."
"Каждого по-настоящему успешного человека сопровождает череда счастливых случайностей, о которых ничего не известно широкой публике."
"Мы должны серьезно относиться к выбору круга общения, потому что люди, с которыми мы знакомы, будут влиять на нас. Это особенно касается молодых людей: чем вы моложе, тем больше на вас влияет поведение и взгляды ваших друзей"
"люди обычно думают, что их поведение является в целом разумной реакцией на ситуацию, в которой они оказались"
"азиаты уделяют больше внимания контексту, чем жители западных стран."
"Подсознание отличается не только значительно большей восприимчивостью, чем сознание, но и способностью одновременно удерживать в голове значительно большее число элементов, причем это могут быть разные виды элементов."
"Если наши взгляды противоречат нашему поведению, что-то должно поменяться: или наши взгляды, или наше поведение. Мы не можем напрямую контролировать свои взгляды, но мы можем контролировать свое поведение. А так как состояние диссонанса губительно отражается на нашем настроении и здоровье, наши взгляды начинают подстраиваться под наше поведение."
"Принцип невозвратных издержек гласит, что, оценивая ваш выбор, нужно учитывать только будущие прибыли и затраты."
"Девиз любого экономиста, который вы должны взять себе на вооружение, гласит, что вся ваша оставшаяся жизнь начинается прямо сейчас. Ничего из прошлого нельзя вернуть. Что упало, то пропало."
"Подумайте над таким высказыванием: «Брак нужен для того, чтобы пережить периоды, когда вы не любите друг друга»."
"Издержки неиспользованных возможностей — это цена действия, при котором теряется прибыль от лучшей альтернативы этому действию. Этот принцип работает тогда, когда ресурсы ограничены и выбранное действие не допускает альтернативы. Эта цена не суммы всех неиспользованных возможностей, а лишь лучшей альтернативы. Ценой выбора может быть что угодно — деньги, время или удовольствие."
"Должны ли вы стричь свой газон? Да — только в том случае, если а) вам нравится это занятие или б) у вас так мало денег, что вы не можете позволить себе роскошь лежать в гамаке и наблюдать, как эту работу делает ваш четырнадцатилетний сосед."
"Внимание к затратам и прибылям, включая невозвратные издержки и ловушку цены выбора, оправдывает себя."
"Имеются доказательства, что люди, которые явно основывают свои решения на теории эффективности затрат и избегают упущенных возможностей, более успешны."
"Посылая людям ваучер на $20, который можно использовать при покупке билета, они продают на 70% больше билетов, чем присылая им на электронную почту письмо с промокодом на скидку $20. Люди не хотят терять выгоду в виде ваучера, который у них уже есть (но его нельзя обналичить);"
"Исследование, проведенное экономистом Рональдом Фрайером и его коллегами, показало, что предложение повысить учителям зарплату, если улучшится успеваемость учеников, не оказало никакого эффекта на успеваемость. Но когда учителя�� дали ту же сумму в начале четверти и сказали, что они должны будут вернуть эти деньги, если ученики не покажут определенный уровень знаний в конце четверти, успеваемость значительно улучшилась"
"Четко спланированную структуру решений, созданную, чтобы действовать в интересах индивидов и общества, Талер и Санстейн назвали «либеральным патернализмом»"
"К сведению продавцов: иногда покупатели осознают издержки бесконечного выбора вариантов и уходят, если их перегружают этим выбором."
"Как сказал Марк Твен: «Работа состоит из того, что человек обязан делать. Игра состоит из того, что он делать не обязан»."
"Рассуждения о проигрыше затмевают в наших глазах рассуждения о выигрыше. Боязнь потерь вынуждает нас упускать множество прекрасных возможностей. Если вы можете себе позволить небольшую потерю в обмен на равный шанс получить большую выгоду, тогда стоит рискнуть."
"Зачастую наблюдения за объектами или явлениями должны восприниматься как примеры выборки."
"Ни животные, ни люди не улавливают связи между двумя намеренно связанными событиями, если интервал между ними превышает несколько минут."
"Опросы общественного мнения убивают истину. (Уилл Дюрант)"
"Если вы решили подвергнуть своего ребенка воздействию бактерий, помните, что такое воздействие полезно в основном в первые годы жизни."
"Латинское слово vacca означает «корова», а vaccinia — «коровья оспа», поэтому Дженнер назвал свое изобретение вакцинацией."
"Многие наши взгляды чрезвычайно зависимы от контекста ситуации и формируются на ходу. Измените контекст, и вы измените мнение, которое высказывали раньше. Печально, но даже такие тривиальные обстоятельства, как порядок задаваемых вопросов, тип и количество используемых категорий ответов и характер предшествующих вопросов, также являются важными факторами, которые формируют контекст и глубоко влияют на высказываемое человеком мнение."
"по возможности не придавайте слишком много значения тому, что говорят люди. Смотрите, что они делают."
"В отличие от дедуктивной логики, индуктивное мышление означает анализ от частного к общему."
"Аристотель ввел три основных закона логического мышления. 1) Тождество: А = А. Любое понятие есть то, чем оно является. А является А и ничем другим. 2) Непротиворечивость: А и не А не могут одновременно быть истинными. Ничто не может быть и не быть. 3) Исключенное третье: все может только быть или не быть. А может быть истинно, либо не А может быть истинно, третьего не дано. То есть высказывание и его отрицание не могут оба быть истинны."
"Основой восточного мышления является не логика, а диалектизм."
"Как писал психолог Кайпин Пен, в основе восточной диалектики лежат три принципа. 1) Принцип изменчивости мира: «Реальность — это процесс изменений. То, что истинно сейчас, вскоре станет неистинным». 2) Принцип противоречивости: «Противоречивость лежит в основе динамики изменений. Противоречивость постоянна, потому что постоянны изменения». 3) Принцип взаимосвязи (или целостности): «Целое больше совокупности частей, его составляющих. Часть имеет значение только по отношению к целому»."
"Изменения порождают противоречия, а противоречия порождают изменения."
"Вопрос «Каким образом?» задается в японских школах примерно в два раза чаще, чем в американских."
"Вопрос «Почему?» задается в американских школах примерно в два раза чаще, чем в японских."
"Благодаря вниманию к контексту древние китайцы правильно понимали то, в чем ошибались древние греки."
"Внимание китайцев к контексту способствовало пониманию того, что некоторые действия могут осуществляться на расстоянии от объекта. Это наблюдение позволило китайцам разобраться в вопросах акустики и магнитных явлений, а также понять истинную причину приливов и отливов. То, что положение Луны может влиять на уровень воды в океане, не пришло в голову даже Галилею."
"В разных культурах предпочитают разные виды логического мышления. Для западной философии основой является формальная логика, а для восточной — диалектика. Два этих типа мышления могут приводить к прямо противоположным и буквально противоречащим друг другу результатам."
"Логика науки — это логика бизнеса и всей жизни. (Джон Стюарт Милль)"
"Следователи в Израиле обнаружили, что, если судья только что пообедал, подсудимого отпустят на поруки с вероятностью 66% 24 . Если же дело слушается прямо перед обедом, вероятность освобождения стремится к нулю."
Тренируй память, мозг и скорочтение. (промо)
"Истолкование нами явлений и событий зависит не только от схем, активизируемых в тех или иных контекстах, но и от фрейминга, то есть форматирования, подачи информации и определения рамок («обрамления») для выводов, которые мы делаем. Порядок, в котором подается информация, — это разновидность фрейминга."
"Подача информации имеет значение. И немалое."
"Эвристика цен убеждает нас, и в большинстве случаев справедливо: что дороже, то лучше."
"Каждого по-настоящему успешного человека сопровождает череда счастливых случайностей, о которых ничего не известно широкой публике."
"Мы должны серьезно относиться к выбору круга общения, потому что люди, с которыми мы знакомы, будут влиять на нас. Это особенно касается молодых людей: чем вы моложе, тем больше на вас влияет поведение и взгляды ваших друзей"
"люди обычно думают, что их поведение является в целом разумной реакцией на ситуацию, в которой они оказались"
"азиаты уделяют больше внимания контексту, чем жители западных стран."
"Подсознание отличается не только значительно большей восприимчивостью, чем сознание, но и способностью одновременно удерживать в голове значительно большее число элементов, причем это могут быть разные виды элементов."
"Если наши взгляды противоречат нашему поведению, что-то должно поменяться: или наши взгляды, или наше поведение. Мы не можем напрямую контролировать свои взгляды, но мы можем контролировать свое поведение. А так как состояние диссонанса губительно отражается на нашем настроении и здоровье, наши взгляды начинают подстраиваться под наше поведение."
"Принцип невозвратных издержек гласит, что, оценивая ваш выбор, нужно учитывать только будущие прибыли и затраты."
"Девиз любого экономиста, который вы должны взять себе на вооружение, гласит, что вся ваша оставшаяся жизнь начинается прямо сейчас. Ничего из прошлого нельзя вернуть. Что упало, то пропало."
"Подумайте над таким высказыванием: «Брак нужен для того, чтобы пережить периоды, когда вы не любите друг друга»."
"Издержки неиспользованных возможностей — это цена действия, при котором теряется прибыль от лучшей альтернативы этому действию. Этот принцип работает тогда, когда ресурсы ограничены и выбранное действие не допускает альтернативы. Эта цена не суммы всех неиспользованных возможностей, а лишь лучшей альтернативы. Ценой выбора может быть что угодно — деньги, время или удовольствие."
"Должны ли вы стричь свой газон? Да — только в том случае, если а) вам нравится это занятие или б) у вас так мало денег, что вы не можете позволить себе роскошь лежать в гамаке и наблюдать, как эту работу делает ваш четырнадцатилетний сосед."
"Внимание к затратам и прибылям, включая невозвратные издержки и ловушку цены выбора, оправдывает себя."
"Имеются доказательства, что люди, которые явно основывают свои решения на теории эффективности затрат и избегают упущенных возможностей, более успешны."
"Посылая людям ваучер на $20, который можно использовать при покупке билета, они продают на 70% больше билетов, чем присылая им на электронную почту письмо с промокодом на скидку $20. Люди не хотят терять выгоду в виде ваучера, который у них уже есть (но его нельзя обналичить);"
"Исследование, проведенное экономистом Рональдом Фрайером и его коллегами, показало, что предложение повысить учителям зарплату, если улучшится успеваемость учеников, не оказало никакого эффекта на успеваемость. Но когда учителя�� дали ту же сумму в начале четверти и сказали, что они должны будут вернуть эти деньги, если ученики не покажут определенный уровень знаний в конце четверти, успеваемость значительно улучшилась"
"Четко спланированную структуру решений, созданную, чтобы действовать в интересах индивидов и общества, Талер и Санстейн назвали «либеральным патернализмом»"
"К сведению продавцов: иногда покупатели осознают издержки бесконечного выбора вариантов и уходят, если их перегружают этим выбором."
"Как сказал Марк Твен: «Работа состоит из того, что человек обязан делать. Игра состоит из того, что он делать не обязан»."
"Рассуждения о проигрыше затмевают в наших глазах рассуждения о выигрыше. Боязнь потерь вынуждает нас упускать множество прекрасных возможностей. Если вы можете себе позволить небольшую потерю в обмен на равный шанс получить большую выгоду, тогда стоит рискнуть."
"Зачастую наблюдения за объектами или явлениями должны восприниматься как примеры выборки."
"Ни животные, ни люди не улавливают связи между двумя намеренно связанными событиями, если интервал между ними превышает несколько минут."
"Опросы общественного мнения убивают истину. (Уилл Дюрант)"
"Если вы решили подвергнуть своего ребенка воздействию бактерий, помните, что такое воздействие полезно в основном в первые годы жизни."
"Латинское слово vacca означает «корова», а vaccinia — «коровья оспа», поэтому Дженнер назвал свое изобретение вакцинацией."
"Многие наши взгляды чрезвычайно зависимы от контекста ситуации и формируются на ходу. Измените контекст, и вы измените мнение, которое высказывали раньше. Печально, но даже такие тривиальные обстоятельства, как порядок задаваемых вопросов, тип и количество используемых категорий ответов и характер предшествующих вопросов, также являются важными факторами, которые формируют контекст и глубоко влияют на высказываемое человеком мнение."
"по возможности не придавайте слишком много значения тому, что говорят люди. Смотрите, что они делают."
"В отличие от дедуктивной логики, индуктивное мышление означает анализ от частного к общему."
"Аристотель ввел три основных закона логического мышления. 1) Тождество: А = А. Любое понятие есть то, чем оно является. А является А и ничем другим. 2) Непротиворечивость: А и не А не могут одновременно быть истинными. Ничто не может быть и не быть. 3) Исключенное третье: все может только быть или не быть. А может быть истинно, либо не А может быть истинно, третьего не дано. То есть высказывание и его отрицание не могут оба быть истинны."
"Основой восточного мышления является не логика, а диалектизм."
"Как писал психолог Кайпин Пен, в основе восточной диалектики лежат три принципа. 1) Принцип изменчивости мира: «Реальность — это процесс изменений. То, что истинно сейчас, вскоре станет неистинным». 2) Принцип противоречивости: «Противоречивость лежит в основе динамики изменений. Противоречивость постоянна, потому что постоянны изменения». 3) Принцип взаимосвязи (или целостности): «Целое больше совокупности частей, его составляющих. Часть имеет значение только по отношению к целому»."
"Изменения порождают противоречия, а противоречия порождают изменения."
"Вопрос «Каким образом?» задается в японских школах примерно в два раза чаще, чем в американских."
"Вопрос «Почему?» задается в американских школах примерно в два раза чаще, чем в японских."
"Благодаря вниманию к контексту древние китайцы правильно понимали то, в чем ошибались древние греки."
"Внимание китайцев к контексту способствовало пониманию того, что некоторые действия могут осуществляться на расстоянии от объекта. Это наблюдение позволило китайцам разобраться в вопросах акустики и магнитных явлений, а также понять истинную причину приливов и отливов. То, что положение Луны может влиять на уровень воды в океане, не пришло в голову даже Галилею."
"В разных культурах предпочитают разные виды логического мышления. Для западной философии основой является формальная логика, а для восточной — диалектика. Два этих типа мышления могут приводить к прямо противоположным и буквально противоречащим друг другу результатам."
July 4, 2017
The first half is a survey of behavioral economics, drawing mostly from the research of Tversky and Kahneman. The second half is a historical summary of formal logic, dialectics, and scientific epistemology. A fairly fun read if you're interested in a broad but shallow academic view of "thinking about thinking."
November 7, 2015
This leans more toward behavioral science than Neuroscience, so there were a number of points that I haven't come across in other brain books. It focuses on some of the cognitive errors we make based on our flawed rule sets. A lot of good stuff in there.
March 17, 2017
Nothing more than Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow.
November 18, 2017
Just one more book about traps inside our own mind
May 24, 2020
Your opinion of this book will vary greatly depending on what other similar materials you've read earlier, that went through better marketing strategies. I tried my best to not make a negative comparison after this disclaimer, but to instead focus on what a potential reader could get out of this book if they weren't too familiar with its topic from other more mainstream sources.
The author is very well renowned, which for me is always a plus. The book itself is intended to help you improve your logical decision-making. I consider myself semi-well acquainted with the subject, so as a result about a quarter of the things in this book were 'new' to me and informational, even if just by being put in a different light by being explained differently. I could appreciate the succint and to the point, maybe even bland style, because, well... it's not a story or a fantasy novel meant to entertain you. You've supposedely picked it up to become more knowledgeable with making decisions. If you've really heard about some of the stuff before, it's not going to hurt to go through it again and chapters are easy to skip if they wont suit you. Ideal for speed-reading.
The author is very well renowned, which for me is always a plus. The book itself is intended to help you improve your logical decision-making. I consider myself semi-well acquainted with the subject, so as a result about a quarter of the things in this book were 'new' to me and informational, even if just by being put in a different light by being explained differently. I could appreciate the succint and to the point, maybe even bland style, because, well... it's not a story or a fantasy novel meant to entertain you. You've supposedely picked it up to become more knowledgeable with making decisions. If you've really heard about some of the stuff before, it's not going to hurt to go through it again and chapters are easy to skip if they wont suit you. Ideal for speed-reading.
October 17, 2020
Good if uneven book on 'thinking tools' or rather on thinking flaws humans have and how to see, understand, and limit them.
Mostly a phycology book that surveys the current understanding of both the big hitters of the field and the authors (good) work. So you have lots of Kahneman and Tversky, Thaler, Levitt and Taleb - well summarised and criticised where appropriate.
You also have good chapters on statistics and probability - how poor people are in general and how easy it is to teach people 'tools' that he can show stick with them - good work here.
I feel this would be an excellent book for a budding 16-18 year old student, I have read much of the work in the original formats so some parts felt a bit 101. Good to go over others. A few were new to me and explained very well - multivariate regression in particular.
Mostly a phycology book that surveys the current understanding of both the big hitters of the field and the authors (good) work. So you have lots of Kahneman and Tversky, Thaler, Levitt and Taleb - well summarised and criticised where appropriate.
You also have good chapters on statistics and probability - how poor people are in general and how easy it is to teach people 'tools' that he can show stick with them - good work here.
I feel this would be an excellent book for a budding 16-18 year old student, I have read much of the work in the original formats so some parts felt a bit 101. Good to go over others. A few were new to me and explained very well - multivariate regression in particular.
April 28, 2019
Kilkanaście narzędzi jak myśleć bardziej logicznie oraz jak podejmować lepsze decyzje popełniając przy tym mniej błędów (a robimy je na każdym kroku). Daję 3,5/5 bo moim zdaniem jest trochę przegadana i słabo uporządkowana aby była takim praktycznym poradnikiem, które dają narzędzia "na tacy". Mimo wszystko polecam jako uzupełnienie Pułapek Myślenia Kahnemana.
August 17, 2018
Nisbett has written a manual on how to suck less at thinking. And after reading it i think we all suck at it and do super easy mistakes when using logic, statitics and reasoning. This is not an easy read however i think it can help to think a bit better after reading it.
January 12, 2021
The 'smart thinking' would be to choose another book around decision making processes and best practices.
August 14, 2018
O livro mescla conceitos e regras interessantes com outras, de certa forma, óbvias, mas que muitas vezes nos esquecemos de aplicar. Considero um belo incentivador para a mente e para o raciocínio. Os capítulos se complementam e, por vezes, dá vontade de voltar para ler os capítulos anteriores.
August 26, 2015
In this excellent and practical book the prominent psychology, Richard Nisbett, translates psychological research into practical advice that will help the reader to better evaluate situations and to make better decisions. The book is in many ways similar to Kahneman’s book “Thinking fast and slow”, in that it explains where our reasoning, deductions and inferences tend to go wrong. However, Nisbett takes the extra step of trying to formulate simple laws that one can follow to avoid the psychological pitfalls that people often fall into. In some cases this merely means being aware that there is such a pitfall, which according to Nisbett actually helps a great deal. For example, if we are aware of our instinctual tendency to rate anecdotal evidence higher than experimental evidence, we can make a conscious effort downplay anecdotal evidence. Similarly, even if no one uses decision theory (listing pros and cons for all alternatives we are faced with) perfectly, knowing the basics will actually help us make slightly better decisions on average.
One of the more notable aspects of modern society is that we are constantly being bombarded with information and commercials. A good chunk of this book is dedicated to deciphering findings reported in the media. For example, we should be very skeptical of correlations, because correlation does not equal causation. If obese children tend to have parents that controls the child’s food intake, that does not mean that controlling your child’s food intake will make them obese. A more likely explanation is that when a child becomes obese, parents will want to control food intake. A huge number of similar findings are reported in the media on a daily basis. Unfortunately, journalists, like the rest of us are also susceptible to think that correlation mean causation, and their reports are written accordingly resulting in a lot of confusion. Knowing the strengths and weaknesses of correlation studies will allow the reader to see such reports in a new light.
Overall, this book is an excellent addition to the popular psychology literature, and Nisbett (who I am familiar with from my studies in Psychology), is a stringent scientist who knows the difference between good science and BS. Readers are certain to find some good, hands on, advice, that they can go out and employ in their everyday life.
One of the more notable aspects of modern society is that we are constantly being bombarded with information and commercials. A good chunk of this book is dedicated to deciphering findings reported in the media. For example, we should be very skeptical of correlations, because correlation does not equal causation. If obese children tend to have parents that controls the child’s food intake, that does not mean that controlling your child’s food intake will make them obese. A more likely explanation is that when a child becomes obese, parents will want to control food intake. A huge number of similar findings are reported in the media on a daily basis. Unfortunately, journalists, like the rest of us are also susceptible to think that correlation mean causation, and their reports are written accordingly resulting in a lot of confusion. Knowing the strengths and weaknesses of correlation studies will allow the reader to see such reports in a new light.
Overall, this book is an excellent addition to the popular psychology literature, and Nisbett (who I am familiar with from my studies in Psychology), is a stringent scientist who knows the difference between good science and BS. Readers are certain to find some good, hands on, advice, that they can go out and employ in their everyday life.
September 14, 2015
The book ahs promising introduction - how to reframe common problems in such a way that these powerful scientific and statistical concepts can be applied to them. Indeed introudction of problem-solving concepts as the law of large numbers, statistical regression, cost-benefit analysis, sunk costs and opportunity costs, and causation and correlation are enlightening and useful.
However, there are areas that suggestions offered by author are not useful. When it comes to testifying health claims reported by media, it is not possible for public to conduct experiment themselves.
The later parts of the book deal with logical and dialectical thinking and other more philosophical concepts. I found these not that practical and therefore not very interested in.
However, there are areas that suggestions offered by author are not useful. When it comes to testifying health claims reported by media, it is not possible for public to conduct experiment themselves.
The later parts of the book deal with logical and dialectical thinking and other more philosophical concepts. I found these not that practical and therefore not very interested in.
May 21, 2017
The first part of the book is a general overview of the cognitive biases that we hold and goes into explaining some basic statistics and how to understand them meaningfully in evaluating scientific studies. The second half brings in more of the author's research on the comparative differences in thinking styles of Eastern and Western cultures-- logic versus dialectical (contextual/holistic) thinking. Nisbett also talks about the importance of falsification and how without experiment, we are prone to tautology and unable to test claims. The book does accomplish what it sets out to do, and I would recommend it to someone not familiar with works on cognitive biases and statistics.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 174 reviews