Konubinix' opinionated web of thoughts

#150 - The Map of Misunderstanding


Discussion between sam harris and Daniel Kahneman

They speak about reproducibility crisis

Système 1 / Système 2

system 1 = ideas that come to mind effortlessly,

misleading useful analogy, that helps people think about useful experiences to make.

most of our representations of the world are in system 1

Being surprised is a system 1 activity.

discussion about intuition

intuition is recognition

Therefore, most of intuition are due to repeated patterns.

educate your system 1

intuition is “knowing” something without knowing where this comes from

work with Gary Klein to identify skilled intuitions

stable environment, repeated experiences, fast and clear feedback, satisfied with chess player metaphor

when the skilled intuition conditions are not met, we still have intuitions

we don’t know whether our intuitions are skilled or not

we tend to trust our intuitions more than we should

when the skilled intuition conditions are not met, we still have intuitions, and we don’t know whether our intuitions are skilled or not

it only takes a thought to automatically and effortlessly come to mind and trust in that though

We tend to rely on stuff that are effortless: cognitive ease

correlation between the accuracy of their judgments and the confidence they experience is not consistently high

studying/knowing about cognitive bias did not change their impact on Daniel Kahneman

you can notice situations were your intuitions are likely to be fooled

This is what happens when you see optical illusions. You become more alert about how your senses can be fooled and we know we should not trust the though that comes to mind.

on the contrary to moral intuitions, chances are that our cognitive bias won’t evolve, because they are wired into our perceptions

Even moral intuitions are fooled. Depending on how you frame the trolley problem, intuitions are different.

our moral intuitions are not coherent

our moral intuitions are diluted in the number of people

  1. showing a picture of a poor little girl :: some donations
  2. the same, with the picture of her little brother :: fewer donations
  3. the same, with numbers telling they are a lot like then :: almost no donation

See Paul Slovic

In the first scenario, we can imagine “saving” the little girl. The system 1 can recognize something and emotions appear. The more actors in the scene, the more abstract the scene is and the less emotion we can put in it (émotion -> action).

This problem becomes a problem of cognitive morality. You know that you should feel better saving more, but you actually don’t.

moral policies should be done by policy makers

And if people need to be convinced of it, simple examples that seduce the system 1 should be used. Numbers just don’t catch people imagination.

like nudge, you know that the problem will be framed, so frame it in a way that helps people do the «right» thing.

But, this comes with the moral dilemma of paternalism.

Make we also think about should I be a team player or a goal player?

basic rule to make people behave a certain way is to make it easy for them

apply some pressure, or remove some pressure

cognitive ease, things that comes to mind easily are more pleasant, and more trusted (fluency)

we are all in a lazy reality testing and tell ourselves stories to have reasons to believe

intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second,

when doing post hypnotic experiments, people know the reason why they do stuffs, but still explain their behavior with the induced feeling

people hypnotized to react to a finger clapping by feeling warm and opening the window. When we ask them why they opened the window, they explain that they felt warm, not that the fingers where clapped.

we should not have face to face meetings

See comment prendre de meilleures décisions et être plus créatif

Even when we also have other criteria.

our own experience is more vivid that numbers and tend to eclipse them

we tend to trust more our own study results that the ones of our colleagues

With no more reason that our own experience is more vivid.

Not only do people get things wrong, but they also get things wrong reliably

cognitive bias

framing works because of wysiati

climate change is the storm of behavior chance science

our own experience is more vivid that numbers and tend to eclipse them moral policies should be done by policy makers

émotion -> action

Therefore, making people worry for such a topic is pretty hard. And people that don’t worry enough are likely not to do anything.

talk about experiencing self and remembering self


to make people happier, work on increasing their possibility to make good memories

intuitively, experiencing self should be preferred, but people tend to optimise their remembering self

Notes linking here