Thinking, Fast and Slow

Short Review: This book is not bad. I probably would have enjoyed it more if I had not just read another behavioral economics book right before it. But I did. So there was a lot of overlap, many of the same studies being cited. And frankly Daniel Kahneman is not as interesting of a writer as Dan Ariely. So I got bored. And when I get bored, I read slow. And this was a library book and it is now due. And I am not likely to check it out again soon.

I am fascinated by behavioral economics. And Daniel Kahneman has won a Nobel Prize in Economics for his work in behavioral economics. He is one of the founders of the field. So you may like the book.

This was a mammoth read, taking about 4 months (put it down for 3 bc it hurt my brain). I'm really glad I chewed through.
The basic premise of the book is that we (human beings) believe we are entirely rational, and make choices reflecting our rationality - but there is an extremely substantial amount of evidence that confirms how wrong this is. This doesn't mean that people are irrational, but we are not “rational” by the definition used, and frequently make decisions that are in contradiction to what is ‘rational' simply because of the way information is presented, and how we are feeling at the time.

A fun example is that when assessing the decisions made by judges granting bail applications, there was a significant correlation between how close the Judge was to lunch-time and how many bail applications were granted. The hungrier they were, the less likely they were to grant a person bail. This goes against a whole lot of beliefs we hold about ourselves, and so this book fully popped the lid for me lol

Pretty dense read though, google some summaries and then hone in on specific chapters if you don't want to read the whole thing! Yahoo

This was a blast from the past from my masters in economics, but I still enjoyed it cover to cover because it made a lot of concepts very tangible and puts decision shortcuts and effects like preference reversal into societal context as opposed to merely claiming irrationality. No wonder it is such a popular book.

This is probably the book that I liked the most in a few years. It made me think, and it taught me to think. It helped me identify flaws in my thoughts and decisions, to categorise them, and then approach them... like an Econ.
It also helped me develop empathy - by helping understand why we sometimes do what we do, when we shouldn't be doing it.
If only it were not so hard to read in the earlier bits, I'd love to give this 6 stars out of 5 🙂

I had to stop reading this book because it was just so difficult to get through.

The Why
I wanted to read this book because it just has sooo many recommendations. I don't have an example of lists-of-books-to-definitely-read where this book is not featured on. As I could get it secondhand at a bargain I bought it and started reading it.

What it's about
Daniel Kahneman is a researcher who has done tons of research on human decision making and thinking, together with his colleague and friend Amos.
Most of this research focuses on the human's two types of thinking; Type 1 which is fast and mostly subconscious, and Type 2, which is slower and more deliberate.
The book explains the differences in these two modes of thinking and what kind of effect this two-mode of thinking has on human decision making. One such example of an effect is what is called the Availability Bias, which I notice a lot in daily life surrounding the choice for Nuclear power. Disasters such as Fukushima and Chernobyl come easily to mind, so the risk of a nuclear disaster is assessed to be higher than it actually is (with newly designed plants almost zero).

How its written
I'm really interested in the books subject; Cognitive Bias and how persons make decisions (and how to make better decisions myself). Unfortunately this book explains these Biases and Heuristics by way of describing experiments. So there were researchers, they did a certain experiment and they found this and that.
Super dry and non imaginative.

Verdict
For me the writing style makes it too boring to read for extended periods of time. I plan to skimp through this and highlight the different heuristics and will dive deeper into a specific section if I want to further my knowledge of a specific heuristic.
If you're more of an “easy-reader” I suggest Factfulness by Hans Rosling, which is soooo much more entertaining to read. Het bestverkochte boek ooit (met deze titel) by Sanne Blauw for the Dutchies amongst you, which focuses on faults in our use of numbers.
Also the podcast from Jordan Harbringer with Gabriel Weinberg is focused on Cognitive Biases, but then with a lot of real-world examples thrown in.

Bastante interesante, lleno de información nueva (para mi).
En algunos puntos si como que no se, me hace dudar de los argumentos que usa, pero la idea es que si te hace pensar, de alguna manera, quieras o no, te hace ver las cosas de forma diferente. Ya solo al final si como que se repiten los temas, a lo mejor para hacerte acentuar lo ya visto durante el libro.

I read this book senior year of college and am never going to read it again, but I wanted it on my Goodreads lol.

This book was super interesting, it genuinely changed the way that I think about stats that people cite and the way that I read. Lots of the stories/examples felt like that card trick at the start of Now You See Me where the movie actually guessed my card because he knew exactly what I was thinking!

Age range: 18+
Complex and probably boring.