Thinking, Fast and Slow

May 04, 2013 Megan Baxter rated it 3 of 5 stars

Thinking, Fast and Slow is just okay. It's being marketed as a book on psychology (and economic psychology, in particular) for the layperson. I'm not sure if other laypeople agree, but this wasn't really for me. And it's not that the prose is too technical (okay, sometimes it is) but rather that Kahneman is stuck somewhere between academic technicalities and clear expressive prose.

In short, sometimes, this book is clunky. There is this one example that I reacted to strongly because I didn't und...more Thinking, Fast and Slow is just okay. It's being marketed as a book on psychology (and economic psychology, in particular) for the layperson. I'm not sure if other laypeople agree, but this wasn't really for me. And it's not that the prose is too technical (okay, sometimes it is) but rather that Kahneman is stuck somewhere between academic technicalities and clear expressive prose.

In short, sometimes, this book is clunky. There is this one example that I reacted to strongly because I didn't understand his explanation. Or rather, to give myself a little credit, because his explanation was crappy. I can think of one simple sentence that would have clearly and easily laid out the whole logical fallacy that I (and, apparently virtually everyone else who read this question ever) fell into. It's very simple. It's very simple to explain.

He doesn't do it. He talks around it, sure, but never gets to the actual nuts and bolts. It wasn't until a stray line at the beginning of the next chapter set off a bunch of associations in my head that I understood what I'd gotten wrong. And if you're trying to explain to people common mistakes in how we think and how to look for them, being able to explain clearly what they are is a bonus.

Once I figured it out, it was obvious. I did exceptionally well in probabilities in my last year of high school math, in the course for those not going on to do any more math ever, entitled "Finite Math." (I did so well the teacher suggested I should think about math as a career. I laughed and laughed.)

There is some good stuff here. There are interesting examinations of why we try to use "intuition" to think statistically, and why that doesn't work. Why we overjudge risk. When we risk, and what the psychology is. Most of the psychology is the psychology of how people interact with the marketplace, and how badly we do it (even, and perhaps particularly, the professionals). I'd be interested to hear how these concepts might be applied to non-economic psychology.

There is a lot of meat in this book. The problem is, to get to it, you have to slog through a lot of fairly boring prose. And I do that during my actual work anyway. I'm not that interested spending my leisure time doing the same. And as the book goes on, the anecdotes that illustrate concepts get fewer and fewer.

This is a fascinating topic, and Kahneman clearly knows his stuff. But the prose style is dry. Take those two things into consideration, and decide whether this one is for you. I don't mind having read it, but I can't say I thoroughly enjoyed it, either.

Crossposted to Smorgasbook (less)

44 likes · like · see review

Apr 02, 2013 Vijai rated it 4 of 5 stars

If your objective is to implement what Mr. Kahneman has to say in real life and benefit from it, I should warn you, you will be sorely disappointed. Believe it or not, in my opinion, I believe Mr. Kahneman is telling you exactly that in this book - that whether you like it or not, your entire life is guided or may I say decided by two fundamental ideas and that there is very little you can do to change it, period.

Mr. Kahneman is probably the villain in every modern day spiritual guru's life, he...more

21 likes · like · see review

view all 4 comments

Devin Vijai wrote: "mmmkay...good luck with that."
You remain unconvinced. Consider this. If you and I are long time poker players and finally one day, I say...more
updated Apr 15, 2013 11:40am

Vijai Oh well! the very fact that there is a switching mechanism from system1 to system2 and vice-versa is just phenomenal depth of complexity to deal with...more
Apr 15, 2013 02:25pm

Feb 20, 2012 Folboteur rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: science-of-mind

In the last few years I have had two books that took me FOREVER to get through. The first was Daniel Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" and the second is Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow." What caused this? What do they have in common? Both books explain, in minute detail, simple concepts with immensely far-reaching implications, and both have been... after the slog... the most intellectually rewarding reading of my adult life.

Where to begin... I have a number of theories running around in...more In the last few years I have had two books that took me FOREVER to get through. The first was Daniel Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" and the second is Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow." What caused this? What do they have in common? Both books explain, in minute detail, simple concepts with immensely far-reaching implications, and both have been... after the slog... the most intellectually rewarding reading of my adult life.

Where to begin... I have a number of theories running around in my head, and occasionally I try to corral them on paper, organize, sequence and interconnect them in a way that will prevent my reader from meaningfully widening their eyes, in an aside, while winding their finger around one ear... ("Cuckoo!") Good writing about complex topics is very, very difficult, and Kahneman has corraled 30+ years of science, his career and all he has learned into a perfectly arranged sequence that leads the reader into a wilderness... provisioning you in each chapter with the tools you'll need for the next part of the journey.

The second most striking effect on me is the number of times I said, "Yes... YES!!! this is what I've been saying!" In my case it has usually been some sort of "intuitive"(excuse me, Mr. Kahneman... I mean "System 1") recognition of a pattern in my observations about the way we think. In Kahneman's case those intuitions have been converted into theoretical propositions, each meticulously researched in well designed experiments. Clearly, this is at least one difference between me and a Nobel Prize winning researcher.

So why does this stuff matter? In the context of broader discussions of free will, intention, choice and control over the directions our lives take, this book can provide some powerful insights that might currently be obscured by these "cognitive illusions" and the inherent limitations of "System 1/System 2" thinking.

Perhaps we're not as "free" in our decisions as we might like to think, if "priming" has such a stunningly reproducible effect. Perhaps we're not so determined, if activities that initially require "System 2" attention, can be turned into second-nature, "technical-expertise intuitions." I.e. learning and training MATTERS in our ability to detect and respond to events that... if untrained... might take advantage of our brain's inherent "blind spots" or weaknesses.

Perhaps childhood religious indoctrination is a very adept recognition of these mental tendencies/flaws, so profoundly (if intuitively/naively) expressed by Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuit order, "Give me the boy until 7, I will give you the man." (paraphrased; forgive me)

Kahneman's discoveries and documentation of mental capacity and biases could form the basis of a "Mental Martial Arts" program: an alternative form of indoctrination, in which students are trained to understand the weaknesses of their brains, and learn to take stances and practices that eliminate or reduce the errors to which these weaknesses can lead.

This book will rearrange the way you think... about how you think.(less)

120 likes · like · see review

Mar 17, 2013 Suhrob rated it 5 of 5 stars

In "Thinking, fast and slow" the Nobel laureate Danny Kahneman summarizes his life long work mostly done with his collegue (and Nobel corecipient) Amos Tversky in the field of cognitive psychology and decision making.

There has been an outcrop of books on this topic in the recent years (Ariely and Lehrer being the bigger names) and there is a significant overlap with similar books. However, for the seriously interested I'd recommend to start here. This is the original reference, the user manual f...more

8 likes · like · see review

May 13, 2012 Richard rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: cognition, non-fiction, unfinished, awaiting-review, really-deep-thinking

Okay, yeah, this has to go on the to-be-read shelf. And the over-stuffed cognition shelf. Hey, at least I was reading Kahneman before he won that Nobel Prize, before he got really popular. But I have to admit I never actually finished his Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases — it was due back at the library when I was only halfway through. That is a slow, engrossing grind of an academic tome, though.

All the reviews have been glowing. Kahneman is golden, of course —he's ascended into...more

8 likes · like · see review

Prof.del The problem seems to me that you can do another psychological study/ experiment to "prove" the "exact" opposite of one study/experiment.
Jul 28, 2012 01:44pm

Richard It might seem that way, but you're playing games with the word "proof".

Science is a collaborative methodology to arrive at a consensus on what is reli...more It might seem that way, but you're playing games with the word "proof".

Science is a collaborative methodology to arrive at a consensus on what is reliable data. The communal aspect is critical — one person, working alone, might very well be doing research, but as long as they are alone, they aren't doing science, and thus aren't "proving" anything scientifically. As much as they might be convincing themselves their hypothesis is correction — and which very well might be — it doesn't achieve the status of scientific proof until the community examines their data and methodology.

This is a perennial confusion in the media, of course. Perhaps it started before the tobacco industry tried to muddy the waters, but that certainly seems to be when folks discovered how easy it was to present people in white lab coats that said whatever was convenient.

Many contrarians aren't bought and paid for, of course, but when the scientific community has achieved consensus on an issue, then it must be tentatively treated as a fact. Very rarely, but sometimes dramatically, one of those mavericks turns out to present a good enough case that the community revisits the idea and changes the "facts". But mavericks are almost always wrong — it's a high-risk proposition to go against the crowd, but the unlikely payoff can be very tempting.

Many folks have trouble with "facts" being arrived at that way, but there is no way for humans to discover the underlying "real" facts. Every time a judge instructs a jury that they are the "triers of fact", they are acting in the same way as the scientific community. For example, here in California, one of the first things a judge reminds a jury is that "You must decide what the facts are in this case." Of course, they're the one's hearing the evidence. In science, the scientists act as the jury. We — society — act as judge, keeping them on the straight and narrow, as it were.

Another useful reminder from the California jury instructions manual —

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you with an abiding conviction that the charge is true. The evidence need not eliminate all possible doubt because everything in life is open to some possible or imaginary doubt.

Frankly, I think that could be phrased better, but the scientific parallel is also true: just because someone comes up with a fanciful way that the conclusion might be wrong isn't grounds for throwing up one's hands and deciding no answer has yet been found.(less)
Jul 28, 2012 02:17pm

Muhammed Al-Bishri Is this book talks about reason within intellectuals?
Aug 18, 2012 02:47pm

Sep 09, 2012 ·Karen· rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction

Behavioural economics: A very rational explanation of why Humans are not rational beings. Which is NOT to say that we are irrational. Just not always terribly consistent. That’s OK.
A bit repetitive, parts of it were familiar from other books like Irrationality, and then there were parts that lost me completely, where even when I kicked my indolent system 2 into slovenly, grudging action, the sheer arithmetics of some examples just would not allow themselves to be beaten into submission, no matte...more

8 likes · like · see review

Apr 29, 2012 Laura rated it 4 of 5 stars

Recommended to Laura by: New York Times

Shelves: being-human, headology, instruction-manual, psychology, economics

Freeman “Dyson Sphere” Dyson wrote the New York Times review, which has me swooning right there. He was a particularly apt pick because Kahneman helped design the Israeli military screening and training systems back when the country was young, and Dyson at 20 years old cranked statistics for the British Bombing Command in its youth. He was part of a small group that figured out the bombers were wrong about what mattered to surviving night time raids over Germany, a thing only about a quarter of...more

18 likes · like · see review

Feb 07, 2012 Jud Barry rated it 4 of 5 stars

I've long wondered about the "rational man" of economic theory and have wondered if there was some kind of drug I could take that would enable me to be that person. And what did it mean that I--fully aware of my emotion-based spending (or, more likely, not spending) decisions--seemed, as a Prius owner, to be much more rational than the majority of American car buyers with their acceptance of insanely low mpg's?

Having read this book, I now believe that the rational man of economic theory needs to...more

11 likes · like · see review

Aug 15, 2012 Ranga Kamaladasa rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction

Hands down, one of the best books in its genre.

The book is a lengthy, self-conscious and a challenging read but highly recommended if you're interested in why human beings behave the way they behave. It's given me so much 'oh snap, so that's why we're so dumb' moments that at this point I don't even want to admit I'm a human to any space-time traveling race that comes in collision of 21st century Earth.

Citing behavioral research studies, he's convinced me that human confidence is a measure of w...more Hands down, one of the best books in its genre.

The book is a lengthy, self-conscious and a challenging read but highly recommended if you're interested in why human beings behave the way they behave. It's given me so much 'oh snap, so that's why we're so dumb' moments that at this point I don't even want to admit I'm a human to any space-time traveling race that comes in collision of 21st century Earth.

Citing behavioral research studies, he's convinced me that human confidence is a measure of whether a person has built up a coherent story not that the person truly knows what she's doing. He's convinced me that the feeling of 'ease' is just cognitive familiarity. He's convinced me why first impressions matter more than we think due to the Halo effect. He's convinced me that the human mind doesn't understand non-events. We think we understand the past, but we really don't. We create coherency by attributing causality to events, but not to non-events. In other words we underestimate the role of luck or the role of unknown variables in a given situation. He has given me reason to believe that in low validity environments, it's better to use formula's than to listen to expert human judgment. For example a simple equation for the stability of a marriage can be better predicted by [frequency of love making - frequency of arguing].

But one of the most interesting hypothesis he builds up is the existence of two systems in the mind. System 1 is prone to cognitive biases described above, but it's also where morality comes from. Not to mention intuitive judgment and hueristic answers to life's everyday questions. Without it, we'd won't survive a day in the life. Not to mention we wouldn't act human. System 2 on the other hand is more introspective, rational and is capable of being aware of the cognitive biases created by System 1. If my understanding is correct then, we can replicate system 2 by a machine or artificial intelligence.

In later chapters of the book, he describes another variation of duality in the human mind. An Experiencing Self and a Remembering Self. With countless examples (both experimental and anecdotal) he vividly paints a picture of how humans have this notion of "I am my remembering self, and strangely my experiencing self is a stranger to me." We're actually okay with letting our Experiencing Self suffer for the good of the Remembering Self!! This ties in to the cognitive bias of "focusing Illusion" (Focalism) and how we tend to overestimate a certain aspect of life.

To put the icing on the cake he finalizes the book by analyzing how we appreciate, value and judge the quality of our lives with all these biases combined. And it's amazing how irrational we are in doing so. Not only have I realized from this book that I should stop worrying about societal standards (because they are mostly based on irrational biases) but that I should spend a significant amount of my time and effort to into creating a value structure ideally suited for myself. Now, only if I had bit more memory and speed on System 2...(less)

10 likes · like · see review

May 20, 2013 Jurgen Appelo rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

A very important book. Everyone should read it. But 1 point off for being so terribly repetitive.

2 likes · like · see review

Feb 11, 2013 Olga rated it 3 of 5 stars

After an initial entry description, this book is basically a catalogue of findings in behavioral economics. I appreciated the fact that it skipped many of the obligatory filler stories that most science writers use to turn articles into books, and I found the book very well edited, with a clear organization by theme and subtheme. That said, if you read Scientific American or any other popular publication, you won't find anything new here.

What strikes me as interesting about the book (and behavio...more

2 likes · like · see review

Mar 20, 2012 Lisa Taylor rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: my-wishlist-nonfiction, read-nonfiction, my-favorites

This was a really interesting book. Thinking Fast and Slow is the culmination of years of Daniel Kahneman’s research into the nature of human decision making, how our minds process the world around us, and basically how people think. From the very start the reader must realize how difficult of a subject this is to explore and understand, let alone explain. Simply by being human, any researcher working on this has to keep in mind that he is prey to the very biases he is working to uncover.

This bo...more This was a really interesting book. Thinking Fast and Slow is the culmination of years of Daniel Kahneman’s research into the nature of human decision making, how our minds process the world around us, and basically how people think. From the very start the reader must realize how difficult of a subject this is to explore and understand, let alone explain. Simply by being human, any researcher working on this has to keep in mind that he is prey to the very biases he is working to uncover.

This book was organized and written very well. Kahneman divides the human mind into two systems from the very beginning, giving these systems traits and tendencies to help us relate to them in ourselves. System 1 is the fast and intuitive thinking, or (if I may generalize here) our subconscious thoughts; our automatic reactions, feelings and impressions. System 2 is our rational system; the one that is often more accurate, but takes up much more energy to use. Most of us can see those two “systems” within ourselves, and that makes the book easy to follow. He often brings up points that seem arbitrary only to have them neatly tied together to create a larger concept a chapter or two later.

I feel like this book was created for those who tend to be of a less scientific mind. He uses examples of experiments very often in the book that seem on the surface to prove his point, but I often wondered about the details of the experiments, which were never included. Now don’t get me wrong; I know nothing about Kahneman’s career and have no reason to think he does not do his research as scientifically as possible; that information just isn’t included in the book. This is an overall explanation of what his research has led him to conclude; if you’re looking for details and numbers and results so you can reach your own conclusion, you won’t find it here. For example:

He wrote about an experiment where subjects heard various groups of words, then had to walk down a hallway to another room to do the second part of the experiment. The actual experiment was how long it took them to walk down the hall. Some people were given words that related to older people, disabilities, and generally being slow while other people were given words that related to young people, fitness, and generally being fast. People who were given the “slow words” took a significantly longer amount of time to walk the distance of the hall than those given the “fast words.” That’s really all he tells the reader because that is all he needs to make his point. And reading that, it is very easy to jump to the conclusion “wow, just hearing words can change our actions” because it’s interesting. He doesn’t answer questions like: Could the words have evoked different themes in different people’s minds? Was a background of the subjects taken to determine their general mood? Were the fast words speeding people up or the slow words slowing people down? How do you know this doesn’t only work with certain themes? Etc.

My point is, take Thinking Fast and Slow with a grain of salt. The book is fun to read in the way that personality tests are fun; it’s always neat to learn more about ourselves, and it fulfills that somewhat narcissistic need in the reader. But that’s system 1 thinking; if you go into this wanting proof, you won’t get it. This is a subject very difficult to study objectively, and while I’m sure he did the job as well as possible, you can’t know that by reading his book because he does not give details, he gives his conclusions. And who can blame him? You don’t sell a book by filling it with numbers, you sell it by making it easy to understand – and when you get into such cutting edge research, there just isn’t a way to make it widely accessible and include all the nitty gritty details.

I do believe this book is a very important stepping stone. Kahneman’s research is just one step toward understanding the human mind. I think many of the experiments he talks about are not enough to draw conclusions, although he does the best that he can. Scientists will continue the same path of research he has taken for centuries to come, and his ideas will be expanded on, accepted or thrown out as we learn more. This isn’t absolute truth. But if you are interested in where we stand on understanding the human mind and what theories are out there, then this book will be invaluable to you.

I do not in any way think reading it is a waste of time since the ideas will most certainly change. Throughout the book he points out many of the common illusions that people fall prey to because of certain biases in our minds, and even if he doesn’t have the processes behind them exactly right (who can really know if he does or not?), that doesn’t mean the illusions aren’t real. Everyone can benefit from reading this book simply by being made aware of these pitfalls and therefore being able to avoid them in the future.

So, what do I think? He went a little light on the explanations, and I wish he had provided more of the scientific details about his work. However, I understand that the book is already lengthy and so he may not have had much choice. I do absolutely recommend this book for any non-fiction readers interested in psychology or in improving their own thought processes.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Jan 22, 2012 Jeff Raymond marked it as unfinished-reads

Shelves: to-read-social-psych

My issue with this book, which is one I've tossed aside after 60 pages, is not so much that it's poorly done or that it's hard to understand - in fact, the exact opposite is true.

The issue is that this book is simply more in depth about psychology and psychological processes than I truly have a short-term interest in. This is more the type of book you keep near your desk or bedside, read a 12 page chapter or so, and digest. This may be a book I need to own and do that with as opposed to tear thr...more

9 likes · like · see review

Feb 27, 2013 Ariadna73 rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: brain-and-mind

Here is my comment in Spanish: http://bit.ly/XhWvoU
Daniel Kahneman is a winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics. Curiously; he only devotes one chapter of this book to his field of expertise (but it is a heck of a chapter; I tell ya) He explains how our brains think in two ways: slow and fast. Our fast brain help us make quick decisions so we don't get ran over by cars or hit by balls; or stand up for days on the supermarket isles deciding which product to buy. The second system thinks more slowl...more

2 likes · like · see review

May 23, 2013 Mark rated it 4 of 5 stars

The old line that true wisdom comes when you realize how little you know is brought to mind by this book which shows us that we often respond to the world using a pre-wired quick-acting, but deeply flawed system of mental function. The author, a Nobel prize laureate, describes his theory of fast and slow methods of thought, which, at first, seems to be an analytical version of the id and ego dressed up and without attribution, but as the stories are told and the experimental results accumulate,...more

like · see review

May 08, 2013 Gerben rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Je zou dit de uitleggerige variant van Dostojevski of Grunberg kunnen noemen. De mens is een marionet - in dit geval van 2 beslissingssystemen - die zichzelf veel teveel rationaliteit op de mouw speld.

Dat inzicht is de conclusie van vele slecht lopende zinnen en lelijke woordkeuzes, maar ik vermoed dat er veel schuld bij de vertaler ligt. Verder is het te opsommerig en worden er, op systeem 1 en 2 na, nauwelijks omvattende, interpreterende kaders in al deze voorbeelden aangebracht. Het is iets t...more

like · see review

Apr 28, 2013 Alex rated it 4 of 5 stars

Sam Harris is right, given the modern onslaught of information sources and resulting fragmentation of one's attention span writing a book over 300 pages better mean that you have something ultra important to say. I would have thought that as a psychologist and a cognitive bias connoisseur Kahneman would have been sensitive to that fact. He wasn't. Yes, the book is quite good, but it is also too long and at times repetitive especially if you are somewhat familiar with the subject. But i suppose t...more

like · see review

Apr 19, 2013 Devyn Duffy rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: People who want to understand themselves

Fascinating look at the ways in which the processes that make our minds work so well sometimes lead to mistakes. A big advantage in the book is that almost all of Kahneman's ideas are presented with examples that allow you to test yourself and see how you might fall victim to the biases that he describes. The downsides of the book for me are that Kahneman doesn't account for choices that he doesn't expect you to make and that I don't always agree with his explanations. For example:

There's one te...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 13, 2013 Steven Peterson rated it 5 of 5 stars

Daniel Kahneman is a renowned psychologist, who won a Nobel Prize in Economics. His work (and that of his late partner, Amos Tversky), and that of a network of colleagues in a similar path, has had an effect on how we see human decision-making. In the social sciences and economics, rationality is a key assumption about human thinking. Kahneman and Tversky and others have put that assumption in the cross hairs of their research. Indeed, some of my own research in political thinking by American ci...more Daniel Kahneman is a renowned psychologist, who won a Nobel Prize in Economics. His work (and that of his late partner, Amos Tversky), and that of a network of colleagues in a similar path, has had an effect on how we see human decision-making. In the social sciences and economics, rationality is a key assumption about human thinking. Kahneman and Tversky and others have put that assumption in the cross hairs of their research. Indeed, some of my own research in political thinking by American citizens is based on this body of work.

In this work, Kahneman begins by noting two systems of thinking. System 1 is automatic, quick, and intuitive. It is decision making by shortcuts. Normally, it works fairly well, but it can also lead to bad decisions. When the stakes are low, even the downside isn't too bad. For major decisions? Well, that can be problematic. The operations of System 2 are (Page 21) "often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice, and concentration." This is the realm of reason and conscious thinking. System 1 tends to be nonconscious.

Part I considers more deeply the operation of Systems 1 and 2. We learn, for example, that System 2 can be lazy and let System 1 "do its thing" without conscious control over those processes.

Part II addresses biases in decision making. This includes the operation of decision making shortcuts, or "heuristics." These are tools that assist decision making and make it quick and easy--and sometimes very wrong. For instance, the law of small numbers. Many people are very confident that judgments that they make based upon a few examples are apt to be correct--even though there is scant statistical indication of this. We do not easily think in terms of probability and statistics. Or availability. We often make decisions based on what pops into our short term memory first, that which is most "available" for retrieval. Or regression to the mean. If someone scores extremely high on the GREs, it is common that the next test would result in lower scores. Why? Many times, very high scores are the result of good luck. Reality will return in such cases, as the next score is likely to revert to a more normal result.

Part III? A series of chapters on overconfidence. It is disconcerting to realize that a lot of our decisions are based on shortcuts that can sometimes go way wrong. Worse, there is plenty of research that shows that once people make decisions, they become overconfident in how good those decisions are. Part IV examines choices. One of the more powerful aspects of Kahneman's and Tversky's work is "prospect theory." Once more, we see skewed decision making at work--far from the realm of rational cost benefit calculators. One key finding here: People tend to be risk averse when they are in positive ground; people are risk takers in negative situations. Example: If you are getting an A in a course and anticipate that that will be your final grade, you are unlikely to cheat. Why? You have a lot to lose and little to gain. On the other hand, if you're facing a D or F, you are, according to many studies, more apt to cheat. The relevance? Some urge being touch on cheaters as a way of deterring academic dishonesty. But someone who is in bad shape to begin with is less likely to be deterred in such a circumstance.

The last part is a reflection on the meaning of all that went before. Also helpful is that some of the major pieces of research are attached as appendices. These may be slow going for some people, but if the reader can wade through them, they get a good sense of how this book came to its conclusions.

A very fine book, well written, that makes important research accessible to a larger audience. (less)

1 like · like · see review

Feb 22, 2013 Nilesh rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: economic-and-finance, good-non-fiction

There is a huge industry that has sprung up in recent decades and Kahneman is one of its founding fathers: no I am not talking about the field of behavioral science, but an industry of writing interesting, instant best sellers mocking at either

A> the scientific linearity assumed in explaining the real world facts or
B> the orthodox statistical formulas employed in estimating the real life events or
C> the bland, Aristotelian rationality assumed for the human decision making process or
a...more There is a huge industry that has sprung up in recent decades and Kahneman is one of its founding fathers: no I am not talking about the field of behavioral science, but an industry of writing interesting, instant best sellers mocking at either

A> the scientific linearity assumed in explaining the real world facts or
B> the orthodox statistical formulas employed in estimating the real life events or
C> the bland, Aristotelian rationality assumed for the human decision making process or
all!

To be honest, there are few real life practitioners of any hard sciences or investment industries who possibly believe in the complete infallibility of the formulas they may have learned from the high-school or university textbooks. The practitioners deploy the archaic-appearing tools mostly because they have little else that is equally usable for even that much utility (which is considerable for most purposes). Rather than using words, impressions and biases alone to draw whatever conclusions, some sort of objectivity obtained with the assumptions that appear ridiculous on close scrutiny is extremely useful. That's what makes planes fly or beam live TVs or help markets channel savings where needed. These things do fail every now and then but the alternatives are worse.

Back to the book (finally), Kahneman's almost repetitive books should be read (along with those of Taleb, Gladwell and so many others) as they shed light on so many irrationalities that most of us are blind to despite being fully aware of the shortcomings of traditional analytical and decision tools. The author is far less useful when he is trying to categorize various thinking patterns through an unlimited toolbox of fancy names, as these categories not only overlap but have no genuine solutions except in the form of beware signs.

But, the real life examples mentioned in the book are absolutely brilliant and in great quantity. If one finds a lot of repetition with other books by the same author or others, it is not counterproductive as coming across the same studies one still finds the aha moments and new details missed in the past or completely forgotten. And there are so many more completely new studies and surveys and explanations.

In conclusion, a must read book not in isolation but as a good book in a type of book one must read once every year or so, There is nothing new in the message but our inherent irrationalities are so many and so stubborn that books like these will always help us introspect our own actions differntly and change some of our ways at least for a while.
(less)

1 like · like · see review

Feb 16, 2013 Tom rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I was prepared for a fairly dry read when I picked up this 500-page book I'd seen described as a summary of more than thirty years of research by Daniel Kahneman into the role of cognitive biases in the failure of the rational agent model in economics. As it turns out, this book was so engaging that I've been unable to refrain from discussing it constantly with friends and coworkers over the past few weeks.

This research, largely done in collaboration with Amos Tversky and which earned Kahneman...more I was prepared for a fairly dry read when I picked up this 500-page book I'd seen described as a summary of more than thirty years of research by Daniel Kahneman into the role of cognitive biases in the failure of the rational agent model in economics. As it turns out, this book was so engaging that I've been unable to refrain from discussing it constantly with friends and coworkers over the past few weeks.

This research, largely done in collaboration with Amos Tversky and which earned Kahneman the 2002 Nobel Prize in Economics, does form the bulk of the book's subject matter. But the book goes beyond his own work, recounting the most influential results in birth of behavioral economics.

The basic psychological results, described in the first of five sections of the book, have led to the development of what Kahneman calls the "Two System" model of the mind. He's careful to clarify that this is merely shorthand for the notion that our conscious thought occurs through two distinct processes. System 1 processes (the fast thinking of the title) allow us to make snap judgments about the world. They happen automatically, and they work quite well most of the time. They work so well, in fact, that we don't invoke System 2 processes (slow, rational thought) nearly as often as we should, partly because it takes a physiological toll. The variety of ways in which System 1 can be fooled- termed cognitive illusions- are the primary subject of this initial section. The other four sections of the book elaborate on the effects of these cognitive illusions on our judgments and our decision making tendencies.

While the consequences of the existence of cognitive illusions make for intriguing (not to mention fairly worrisome) reading, it was the first section of the book I found most fascinating. As an example of what's discussed in it, consider the Florida Effect, discovered by John Bargh and collaborators in a study done at NYU. The study participants were NYU students, mostly between 18 and 22 years old. These were divided into two groups, each of which were given five words out of which they were to choose four to make a sentence. One group was given a set of neutral words, while the other was given a set of words relating to aging, e.g., wrinkled, bald, Florida. They were then asked to walk down a hall to another lab for the next part of the study, but the time it took them to walk down the hall was the actual measurement that was being made. The group that had been given the aging-related words was found to walk significantly slower than the other group. This is an example of "priming," and it shows how easily our automatic assessments of the world can be influenced by factors that should be irrelevant.

Highly recommended to everyone.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Feb 10, 2013 Darryl Brashier rated it 5 of 5 stars

This isn't a book for everyone. It's long and deep and is not a "popular" book like Malcolm Gladwell writes.

Having said that, it's also one that we bought in hardback so that we could read it aloud and discuss it. The simple demonstrations of how we think fast and slow have been enough to provide hours of discussion so far.

What I've seen so far suggests that where the fast thinking "system 1" is absolutely necessary to our functioning, it is also equipped to lead us into errors. "System 2", our...more

3 likes · like · see review

Feb 09, 2013 Andrewcharles420 rated it 2 of 5 stars

What a monstrous chore to read! I've been working on this book since September or August (4-6 months) and just could not take reading it for more than a few minutes at a time. Many times did it put me to sleep.

The book covered a lot of great material and really fascinating research, but oftentimes in such plodding, pedantic, meticulous detail as to nearly obfuscate the point. I have heard of the majority of the research (or at least their conclusions) as well, so while I thought it offered exce...more What a monstrous chore to read! I've been working on this book since September or August (4-6 months) and just could not take reading it for more than a few minutes at a time. Many times did it put me to sleep.

The book covered a lot of great material and really fascinating research, but oftentimes in such plodding, pedantic, meticulous detail as to nearly obfuscate the point. I have heard of the majority of the research (or at least their conclusions) as well, so while I thought it offered excellent insight and useful material for a lot of people to learn, I didn't think this collection of it--more of a history of the field than an introduction--added anything novel or unique for one already well-versed in the material. I guess I didn't care for the details in how the studies were conducted for every minor point in the author's theories--though I largely agreed with the theories and interpretations.

A line near the end of the book struck a dissonant chord with me and I wonder if that offers an additional cause for my dislike: "That was my reason for writing a book that is oriented to critics and gossipers rather than to decision makers." I wouldn't count myself among 'decision makers' in any important sense (it's surprising how little responsibility a person can have sometimes!), but I often felt like the book wasn't speaking to me. Many times the author wrote "we think..." or "we act..." in such a way that I don't think I'd do. This isn't to say I'm a purely 'rational agent' or 'Econ' or anything like that--the majority of the authors theories (thinking can be either instinctual or effortful, rational agents act differently than emotional humans, and the experiencing self and the remembering self are different things) are immanently true--but I do think he was generalizing for a WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic) audience, and despite my background, I don't think I think that way.

Recommendation: read the introduction and the conclusion (and perhaps the major section intros), cherry-pick anything else of interest.
(less)

1 like · like · see review

Feb 07, 2013 Carolyn rated it 5 of 5 stars

OK, when I went to select this book, there was another option for the 30-minute summary. Which is ironic in the real sense of the word because this is a book about the value of thinking hard, which takes time. Kahneman is a leading expert in cognitive psychology, especially the psychology of decision-making, which took him into economics, where he upset the apple cart. Thing is, evidently people don't make decisions according to economic theory. Kahneman calls the mythological beings who are rat...more

2 likes · like · see review

Nov 26, 2012 Raghu rated it 3 of 5 stars

I am familiar with Daniel Kahneman's work through many of his essays and articles in various magazines in the past. I had always found them thought-provoking, interesting and challenging established notions. That is why I was excited to read this book on Behavioral psychology by him. However, this book lived up to my expectations only partially. One reason is that the author's contention that 'our intuitive preferences are more influential than rational choice' gets well established fairly early...more I am familiar with Daniel Kahneman's work through many of his essays and articles in various magazines in the past. I had always found them thought-provoking, interesting and challenging established notions. That is why I was excited to read this book on Behavioral psychology by him. However, this book lived up to my expectations only partially. One reason is that the author's contention that 'our intuitive preferences are more influential than rational choice' gets well established fairly early in the book through the many experiments that he describes. Consequently, I felt a sense of repetition in the latter half of the book and gradually felt that the book lost steam completely towards the closing sections.

To put it simply, the book says that there are two systems which drive the way we think and make choices. The author calls them System 1 and System 2. System 1 is intuitive, quick and influenced by emotion. System 2 is slower, rational, logical and reflective. The author's research says that System 1 is more influential than what our experience tells us and it is the subliminal determinant of the many choices and judgments that we make. This is contrary to our general belief that we are very rational in our decision-making. The many example experiments that the book outlines show us that we must really be a lot more watchful in the assurance with which we trust our decisions as rooted in rationality. To me, this is the biggest lesson from the book.

A few other points of interest from the book are:

1. Luck plays a large role in every story of success. The author illustrates it with the telling contemporary example of the founders of Google willing to sell their company for less than $1 million but the buyer thought that the price was too high!
2. High intelligence does not make people immune to biases
3. Rationality should be distinguished from intelligence.
4. While talking about the consequences of Priming, the author points to a conclusion that may be an indictment of capitalist society. He says that living in a culture that surrounds us with constant reminders of money may shape our behavior and attitudes in ways that we do not know about and of which we may not be proud.
5. On the subject of Intuition vs Formulas, the author quotes a memorable formula of researcher Robyn Dawes:
Marital Stability = frequency of lovemaking - frequency of quarrels!
6. In the final section of the book, titled 'Two Selves', the author dabbles into the question of human happiness. Two statements caught my attention.
a. The easiest way to increase happiness is to control your use of time. Can you find more time to do the things you enjoy doing?
b. There is low correlation between individuals' circumstances and their satisfaction with life. The reason is that both experienced happiness and life satisfaction are largely determined by the genetics of temperament.

In this context, I wondered whether the author is aware of Friedrich Nietzsche's contention that animals are happy because they lack a capacity for past memories. Perhaps the author's term 'genetics of temperament' include a capacity to forget the past and move on with life.

I found it educational and interesting in parts but somewhat disappointing overall, given my initial expectations from the author.
(less)

1 like · like · see review

Nov 23, 2012 Ianwells rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is one of the most informative books I have read. We even went out and bought a hard copy for reference!
Kahneman is a psychologist so the book is a summary of his experiments about how our minds work. In particular, he gives a practical model of how we can thin of our minds working: subconscious ( thinks fast) and conscious ( thinks slow)

His nobel prize was in economics because he applied the results of experiments to practical things, like how our decision making affects economy.
Each cha...more

like · see review

Nov 21, 2012 Dermot Harnett rated it 5 of 5 stars

Kahneman's book on cognitive biases joins a number of other recent books on teh topic. It has the merit of being written by the man responsible for much of the primary literature. The topic is a popular one and for good reason. Human irrationality is a common thread that unites a huge variety of subjects, it explains the necessity of the scientific method, bears hugely on economics and bears a direct, practical relevance on our every day lives.

Kahnemans writing is lucid and nontechnical. Anybod...more

like · see review

Nov 04, 2012 Judith rated it 4 of 5 stars

What I learned from this book is that you don't think anything like you think you think. And this isn't some pop psychology self-improvement book. This is a very complex book by a man who won the Nobel prize in Economics in 2002. I have to admit that I am only half-way through the book because I made the mistake of getting the audio version, couldn't finish it before it was due back at the library, and I need to get the printed version anyhow before I continue. In addition to the frustration of...more

2 likes · like · see review

Nov 02, 2012 Bob Nichols rated it 4 of 5 stars

The long, tiring and unproductive debate between the role of emotion and reason gets some helpful clarity with this thoughtful, refreshing book. Kahneman discusses two systems that largely govern our interactions with the world. System 1 is what most understand as intuition. It runs on automatic, with little sense of voluntary control. It bubbles up from the inside, reflecting likes and dislikes, and our predispositions. System 1 governs us for the most part and largely does a good job Kahneman...more The long, tiring and unproductive debate between the role of emotion and reason gets some helpful clarity with this thoughtful, refreshing book. Kahneman discusses two systems that largely govern our interactions with the world. System 1 is what most understand as intuition. It runs on automatic, with little sense of voluntary control. It bubbles up from the inside, reflecting likes and dislikes, and our predispositions. System 1 governs us for the most part and largely does a good job Kahneman states. When System 1 runs into a problem, System 2 kicks in. System 2 involves conscious thought and choice. System 2 draws from a limited energy pool to focus on what it needs to do to resolve the challenges that we confront. System 2 involves self-control, limiting and regulating the impulses that come from System 1. While this requires effort and is tiring, there are situations that so absorb the individual that "no exertion of self control" is involved, "thereby freeing resources to be directed to the task at hand." This "optimal experience" is called "flow" by some.

A typical discussion of this subject area has the mind either impotent in its capacity to control emotion or has the mind reigning supreme over the emotions. Kahneman agrees that the emotions infuse thought (System 1)and that thought (System 2) can override the emotions. But rather than pitting each against the other, Kahneman has them working together as a team. For the most part, System 1 is operative. When System 1 needs help, System 2 steps in. This complementary approach, he writes, is "highly efficient: it minimizes effort and optimizes performance." To be sure, System 1 is full of biases (immune to the requirements of the world) that, he argues, can't be avoided, and System 2's role is to be aware of situations where mistakes are likely and to take corrective action. While intuition often misleads and expert judgement is often filled with biases, Kahneman also argues that intuition is informed by "prolonged practice" and experiences working in a predictable environment.

The book then provides examples of where these two systems play out in our daily lives. For example, the halo effect of System 1 is extended inappropriately to other realms so that if we like a person in one sense, we tend to see that person as positive in all respects. Because of the mental effort involved with System 2, a heuristic affect substitutes or reframes a problem into an easier proposition (Instead of "I think" we say, "I feel"). In serving System 1, the mind becomes an apologist for our emotions or searches for arguments and information that validates our position. We construct (make up) stories to explain our view of the world and tend to see patterns and randomness because this is the easier way to go for System 2. This includes a propensity to assign agents and causality that is likely the origin of our relgious impulse that sees, quoting Paul Bloom, "soulless bodies and bodiless souls". "The sense-making machinery of System 1," Kahneman writes, "makes us see the world as more tidy, simple, predictable, and coherent than it really is." It's easier to think about the world this way. Continuing with that line of thought, Kahneman says we think in terms of stereotypes because it's easier to categorize the world that way, reflecting System 2's propensity for laziness. When System 1 wants to do something, we tend to overestmate benefits and underestimate costs because effortless want overwhelms effortful analysis. Most of the latter part of the book deals with the implications for the rational man theory that underlies much of economic theory.

In reading this book, there's the faint echo coming from Joseph LeDoux's "The Emotional Brain" (1996). In that book, LeDoux suggested this teamwork approach between the so-called primitive part of our brain and the conscious part. LeDoux saw that pattern in connection with fear, but suggested this complementary relationship between the two systems might have wider applications. In reflecting on one's own daily life, this all seems to fall in place. It's interesting that System 1 seems to come up from within the individual and reflects who that individual is at his or her core. It's almost "egocentric" in that way as it acts on the world. For the most part, there's a fit, but when there's not, System 2 is activated, and requires the mind to re-regulate the self's interaction with the world so that it fits what that external world requires.

As a last observation, Kahneman quotes Bentham: "'Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do.'" Later, Kahneman observes that we are driven to more strongly avoid losses than to achieve gains and that "Animals, including people, fight harder to protect losses than to achieve gains." It's hard not to wonder how these two thoughts are related. We seek pleasure and avoid pain, but these are really the same thing: by defending ourselves (avoid pain), we enable ourselves to seek what is beneficial to ourselves (bring pleasure). In extending this notion, fear rises up to not just "another emotion" but as the equivalent in status as seeking pleasure: Fear is to defend the integrity of the self against the world (avoid pain) and we defend ourselves so that we can seek pleasure. Defense is the prerequisite of seeking pleasure. This, perhaps, is a way to understand Kahneman's formulation that we fight harder to protect losses than to achieve gains.

(less)

1 like · like · see review

Oct 10, 2012 Andrew Griffith rated it 5 of 5 stars

There is much to recommend in this book, whether it be on a personal or professional level, in terms of the increased self-awareness it engenders on how one makes decisions or come to conclusions, and how the automatic (System 1) dominates the more deliberative (System 2).

As part of leadership training, I had been exposed to some of this before, but Kahneman takes it to another level, both in terms of understanding as well as some practical steps to avoid blind spots. Interestingly, he acknowled...more There is much to recommend in this book, whether it be on a personal or professional level, in terms of the increased self-awareness it engenders on how one makes decisions or come to conclusions, and how the automatic (System 1) dominates the more deliberative (System 2).

As part of leadership training, I had been exposed to some of this before, but Kahneman takes it to another level, both in terms of understanding as well as some practical steps to avoid blind spots. Interestingly, he acknowledges that as individuals, we are notoriously ill-equipped to self-police (even himself who is super aware); however, institutions are better equipped to inoculate themselves (and even better when they have to work with other institutions), at least partially, from some of the main patterns:

- tendency to jump to conclusions (System 1);
- exaggerated faith in small sample sizes which are less reliable or representative than large sample sizes (e.g., exceptions catch our interest more);
- anchoring effect to a specific number (e.g., house listing price) rather than more independent evaluation;
dramatic, personal or publicized events are stronger than probabilities based on large sample sizes (e.g., risk of cancer, plane crashes), and tend to be overestimated;
- most exceptions regress to the mean – so if someone is having a winning streak, it is likely to end;
expert intuition is more reliable when concrete (e.g., firefighters, medical professionals) than not (e.g., social scientists, financial analysts);
- prospect theory, or how we are inclined to take a sure gain but gamble to avoid the risk of a loss (loss aversion); and,
- behavioural economics has corrected the classical economic view of people as ‘rational’ agents given these and other patterns.

While this may be somewhat of a caricature, Thinking, Fast and Slow provoked reflection on the contrast between political and bureaucratic decision-making. The political level draws heavily on anecdotes, stories and what “people on the ground” are saying, with the impressions largely formed under System 1. The bureaucratic level draws more heavily on more impersonal, large-scale studies and research, or evidence-based policy, to have a wider base of information (System 2).

Of course, many politicians, in developing their political approach, have taken an intellectual journey that is more reflective and deliberative. And many officials, in selecting and citing large-scale studies, have their own automatic System 1 influencing the procedural and methodological choices (see this clip from Yes, Prime Minister at about the one minute mark for the extreme version). This is part of how the two systems work together in all of us.

My own experience with how this worked was in reshaping policies to address one of the government’s priorities. Our evidence base, while solid, was overly comfortable and reflected the priorities of earlier governments. Faced by Ministers and political aides saying that none of this resonated with what they were hearing in their interaction with a wide range of Canadians, we had to rethink and develop a broader evidence base.

Just as policy making by anecdote and broader evidence leads to bad policy (readers from any country can likely find a few examples), policy that ignores anecdote and public opinion for the more formal broader evidence base risks missing some of the granularity and not responding to public concern.

The combination of research and anecdotes, arguably makes for better policy and programs, as it respond to both more reliable evidence and to what people are saying in a democratic society.

Highly recommended for decision-makers in particular, although all will find his book and findings interesting and useful.(less)

like · see review

topics	posts	views	last activity
discussing the theories and their applications in our daily lives and professional	2	10	Apr 26, 2013 12:45pm
Gladwell or Kahneman	18	215	Apr 17, 2013 01:23am
Goodreads Librari...: Description error - ISBN 9780141033570	2	34	Apr 01, 2013 08:36pm
Gwinnett County P...: Be a Nerd, Or Just Read Like One	1	15	Oct 09, 2012 07:56am

title link	preview: Thinking, Fast and Slow
avg rating	preview: Thinking, Fast and Slow Goodreads rating: 4.02 (20348 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11468377-thinking-fast-and-slow?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1317793965l/11468377.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11468377-thinking-fast-and-slow?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman[/url]

Thinking, Fast and Slow

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (35)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Daniel Kahneman

Books by Daniel Kahneman

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Thinking, Fast an...

Quotes from Thinking, Fast and Slow