I just want to say that I'm glad I read this book again! I had read it many years ago and was surprised at how little I remembered considering I talk about System 2 thinking and a few of the biases all the time. It was helpful to review all the details and examples because I do believe that learning to shift our thinking and be aware of our biases and cognitive illusions is very important!
Also, I forgot to add it, but big applause for all the read runners with this book - it was quite an undertaking and you all did such a great job summarizing, asking questions, and leading us through a tough book! ππ» ππ» ππ» ππ»
12. What are your overall thoughts and conclusions about this book? Did you learn anything new that you hadn't considered regarding the way you think? Would you say that the book was successful in what it was trying to teach the reader?
The fact that so many of the examples throughout were so relatable gives credit to a lot of the theories presented. It's almost like I can actually hear two voices in my head, one that comes up with an answer right away and another that takes a closer look and thinks differently. So I suppose I've learned that when making judgements, try to take the time for the second voice to speak.
I think the book did a good job trying to stay applicable to the general public, and not just economists and psychologists. It was successful in pointing out the flaws in our intuitive thinking without talking down to the reader, and was largely very encouraging.
I enjoyed this read and thought many of the ideas shared were relatable. Iβm glad I pushed myself out of my comfort zone to read this one but I donβt know if I would be eager to pick up something like it again for a while.
It was interesting. I learnt a lot, but it was heavy and I am not sure how much I have absorbed or will be able to recall ina few days/weeks/months. I think I'll stick to some less dense reads for a while too.
Agreed on the density. I must admit to skimming the last sections because this was so interesting, but also, it was a lot of work for my brain! And it's a re-read for me!
11. What new information did you gather from reading the articles in Appendix A and B? Do you think these articles needed to be included in the book? Why or why not?
I skimmed through the appendices, they seemed like they were written for a different audience and got into some statistics that went over my head. I still think they were interesting, and helped put into perspective how these theories discussed throughout the book were put forward and presented to the experts.
10. What was your overview of the conclusions chapter? Where you satisfied with Kaheman's explanations of the many topics explored in this book during this last overview?
It was a nice summary, and I liked how he summarized the book backwards, starting with the two selves and going back to the two systems foundations. The different ordering of the material for the summary added a different perspective.
I think having a summary/conclusion like this is important given how much is cobered and how dense the material was! It was helpful, for sure! I also think it shows how Kahneman was really thinking like a teacher while writing this book - he really cares about us learning and retaining the main points.
8. Do you concur with Kehneman's evaluation of figure 16 in chapter 38 and do you think there is an element not mentioned that could also satisfy Kehneman's perspective concerning figure 16?
I think the graph makes sense and can apply to anything positive in your life. It's a kind of recency bias. If you just bought a really nice car, the graph would probably look similar, until the novelty wears off.
I am celebrating my 10 year anniversary this week and wonder whether the downward trend is supposed to continue in this graph or not lol. Seriously though I think u/jaymae21 is spot on with the recency bias theory
7. Did you have any knowledge how influential Kaheman and his counterparts research was on national surveys and the Gallop polls? What are some of the aspects of life that have an effect on these evaluations?
6. We are given a great deal of results that these surveys generated. Did the U-index information seem relevant to what Kaheman was seeking to discover? What are your thoughts about Kaheman's conclusions from these surveys?
5. Where you surprised about the methods Kehneman went to measure the well-being of the experiencing self? What were some of the developments his team made regarding collecting information that you found the most interesting?
4. Which (if any) do you think is a more significant the Peak-End rule or Duration neglect in regards to evaluations of entire life experiments by Ed Diener?
Am I the only one wonder if the only really reliable way to evaluate the Peak-End rule would be to ask people who went out on a high....and well the only way to do that would be to communicate with dead people?!
This was a real interesting one. I think if my body felt refreshed and relaxed after, even if I didn't remember it, I wouldn't care where I was or what I did.
2. Did the cold water experiment results surprise you? What can we gather from the participants reactions with given the choice between repeating the 60 second or 90 second cold water immersion for the theoretical third immersion presented during the experiment?
I was fascinated by this section on people's responses to pain and enjoyed Kahneman's discussion of whether medical professionals should focus on minimizing pain or reducing the duration of a procedure. I did find it surprising that people preferred the 90 second immersion with a decrease in pain at the end. In terms of healthcare, it shows that people would rather have a longer procedure with a decrease in pain felt at the end than a shorter one that ended more painfully. It's very strange.
I am re-reading this after many years, and this is one of the clearest memories I have from the first read. I think about it a lot in practical terms - if I end something on a positive note, even if it wasn't going well initially, I will likely leave people more satisfied than if I kept trying to minimize problems all the way through. For instance, as a teacher planning event that parents will attend, I should try to make the whole event good, but it seems especially important to end on a high note! That way, if anything did go badly, they'll still walk away pleased.
This section was so interesting, but I found myself thrown by the dominance he claims for the remembering self. I think the extent of that is going to depend person to person - I myself am one that struggles to remember to snap a photo when I go on vacation. However, in the age of social media, I think the idea of a remembering self is very intriguing and could possibly extend to how others remember you as well.
I wonder if this is the whole of his findings or if this is a simplified version for us layfolk? I can appreciate that our system 1 is a result of our experiences and so our memories. Meaning that our remembering self is heavily involved in making snap decisions without the lazy system 2. Idk maybe I just don't quite grasp it all.
13. Any other topics or discussions concerning Thinking Fast and Slow that you would like to mention?
I just want to say that I'm glad I read this book again! I had read it many years ago and was surprised at how little I remembered considering I talk about System 2 thinking and a few of the biases all the time. It was helpful to review all the details and examples because I do believe that learning to shift our thinking and be aware of our biases and cognitive illusions is very important!
Also, I forgot to add it, but big applause for all the read runners with this book - it was quite an undertaking and you all did such a great job summarizing, asking questions, and leading us through a tough book! ππ» ππ» ππ» ππ»
12. What are your overall thoughts and conclusions about this book? Did you learn anything new that you hadn't considered regarding the way you think? Would you say that the book was successful in what it was trying to teach the reader?
The fact that so many of the examples throughout were so relatable gives credit to a lot of the theories presented. It's almost like I can actually hear two voices in my head, one that comes up with an answer right away and another that takes a closer look and thinks differently. So I suppose I've learned that when making judgements, try to take the time for the second voice to speak. I think the book did a good job trying to stay applicable to the general public, and not just economists and psychologists. It was successful in pointing out the flaws in our intuitive thinking without talking down to the reader, and was largely very encouraging.
I enjoyed this read and thought many of the ideas shared were relatable. Iβm glad I pushed myself out of my comfort zone to read this one but I donβt know if I would be eager to pick up something like it again for a while.
It was interesting. I learnt a lot, but it was heavy and I am not sure how much I have absorbed or will be able to recall ina few days/weeks/months. I think I'll stick to some less dense reads for a while too.
Agreed on the density. I must admit to skimming the last sections because this was so interesting, but also, it was a lot of work for my brain! And it's a re-read for me!
11. What new information did you gather from reading the articles in Appendix A and B? Do you think these articles needed to be included in the book? Why or why not?
I skimmed through the appendices, they seemed like they were written for a different audience and got into some statistics that went over my head. I still think they were interesting, and helped put into perspective how these theories discussed throughout the book were put forward and presented to the experts.
10. What was your overview of the conclusions chapter? Where you satisfied with Kaheman's explanations of the many topics explored in this book during this last overview?
It was a nice summary, and I liked how he summarized the book backwards, starting with the two selves and going back to the two systems foundations. The different ordering of the material for the summary added a different perspective.
I think having a summary/conclusion like this is important given how much is cobered and how dense the material was! It was helpful, for sure! I also think it shows how Kahneman was really thinking like a teacher while writing this book - he really cares about us learning and retaining the main points.
9. In your own words what is The Focusing Illusion and can you give any examples of it outside of the examples presented in the book?
8. Do you concur with Kehneman's evaluation of figure 16 in chapter 38 and do you think there is an element not mentioned that could also satisfy Kehneman's perspective concerning figure 16?
I think the graph makes sense and can apply to anything positive in your life. It's a kind of recency bias. If you just bought a really nice car, the graph would probably look similar, until the novelty wears off.
I am celebrating my 10 year anniversary this week and wonder whether the downward trend is supposed to continue in this graph or not lol. Seriously though I think u/jaymae21 is spot on with the recency bias theory
7. Did you have any knowledge how influential Kaheman and his counterparts research was on national surveys and the Gallop polls? What are some of the aspects of life that have an effect on these evaluations?
6. We are given a great deal of results that these surveys generated. Did the U-index information seem relevant to what Kaheman was seeking to discover? What are your thoughts about Kaheman's conclusions from these surveys?
5. Where you surprised about the methods Kehneman went to measure the well-being of the experiencing self? What were some of the developments his team made regarding collecting information that you found the most interesting?
4. Which (if any) do you think is a more significant the Peak-End rule or Duration neglect in regards to evaluations of entire life experiments by Ed Diener?
Am I the only one wonder if the only really reliable way to evaluate the Peak-End rule would be to ask people who went out on a high....and well the only way to do that would be to communicate with dead people?!
3. Answer Kahneman's thought experiment concerning Amnesic Vacation. How would you answer this question? Explain your rational for your answer.
This was a real interesting one. I think if my body felt refreshed and relaxed after, even if I didn't remember it, I wouldn't care where I was or what I did.
2. Did the cold water experiment results surprise you? What can we gather from the participants reactions with given the choice between repeating the 60 second or 90 second cold water immersion for the theoretical third immersion presented during the experiment?
I was fascinated by this section on people's responses to pain and enjoyed Kahneman's discussion of whether medical professionals should focus on minimizing pain or reducing the duration of a procedure. I did find it surprising that people preferred the 90 second immersion with a decrease in pain at the end. In terms of healthcare, it shows that people would rather have a longer procedure with a decrease in pain felt at the end than a shorter one that ended more painfully. It's very strange.
I am re-reading this after many years, and this is one of the clearest memories I have from the first read. I think about it a lot in practical terms - if I end something on a positive note, even if it wasn't going well initially, I will likely leave people more satisfied than if I kept trying to minimize problems all the way through. For instance, as a teacher planning event that parents will attend, I should try to make the whole event good, but it seems especially important to end on a high note! That way, if anything did go badly, they'll still walk away pleased.
1. What were your opinions on the two selves? Do you concur with Kahneman that the remembering self is in charge of making decisions?
This section was so interesting, but I found myself thrown by the dominance he claims for the remembering self. I think the extent of that is going to depend person to person - I myself am one that struggles to remember to snap a photo when I go on vacation. However, in the age of social media, I think the idea of a remembering self is very intriguing and could possibly extend to how others remember you as well.
I wonder if this is the whole of his findings or if this is a simplified version for us layfolk? I can appreciate that our system 1 is a result of our experiences and so our memories. Meaning that our remembering self is heavily involved in making snap decisions without the lazy system 2. Idk maybe I just don't quite grasp it all.