For example, when you order something new in a restaurant – perhaps anchovy pizza — you should learn whether you like or dislike anchovy pizza, rather than attr

For example, when you order something new in a restaurant – perhaps anchovy pizza — you should learn whether you like or dislike anchovy pizza, rather than attribute the pleasurable experience to the particular table you’re sitting at. Or when crossing a street, you should pay attention to the speed and direction of oncoming traffic, while the colors of cars can be safely ignored. So in these two examples it's pretty obvious to most people what we should be paying attention to. But worth remembering, perhaps, that the same problem of 'what is relevant here' also occurs a lot in situations where it is not so clear what is the relevant factor. e.g. You have problems with asthma, you change your diet, the asthma gets better, was the change in diet actually the relevant factor? And even in those two 'obvious' examples it's possible to get this wrong. e.g. You decide you don't like anchovies, but actually this is just because you went to a bad restaurant, the anchovies were much too salty, and another time you try better quality / better prepared / better dosed anchovies, and like them. I guess my point is that the deciding what is relevant part of this is not trivial, and strategies and mechanisms for achieving this effectively are important.