3 ms·

I thought the key phrase in your comment was: "Your startup depends almost entirely on the thinking and behavior of people", emphasis mine, and I responded to t

by mojuba 19y ago

I thought the key phrase in your comment was: "Your startup depends almost entirely on the thinking and behavior of people", emphasis mine, and I responded to this seemingly wrong idea. I assumed "thinking and behavior" implies some specific psychological aspects rather than "thinking and behavior" in a broad sense. Anyway, I suggest a thought experiment: let's say we have a successful tech startup of 2 founders, 3 more developers and an accountant. How exactly would you apply Munger's theory of misjudgement in this startup to make it better? (more productive, improve the social atmosphere, better understand customers, etc - what else?) Just 2-3 key points maybe, from the "nuanced, intelligent perspective" you seem to be looking from.

h34t 19y ago
It sounds like you're asking me to repeat exactly the same task that Andreessen and Munger have already attempted -- to show how understanding human misjudgment can be valuable to people in business/entrepreneurship. If they were unable to convince you, I'm not sure I can.
h34t 19y ago
Also -- in response to the thought experiment: For me to "apply Munger's theory of misjudgment in this startup to make it better" would basically entail putting myself in that startup's environment, probing the situation to get a sense of what's going on, and then using all the "mental models" or "thinking tools" I've got (including a lot of stuff about human misjudgments which seem to be really useful and accurate a lot of the time) to understand their situation & think of what could be done in new and better ways. I don't believe that the best way to solve most problems is by using formulas that are so overcertain of themselves that they presume to be able to solve someone else's problems from a distance, without knowing the details of a situation or interacting in that environment. I believe that details matter, as does close interaction with the environment that sustains your project.

by mojuba 19y ago

h34t 19y ago

It sounds like you're asking me to repeat exactly the same task that Andreessen and Munger have already attempted -- to show how understanding human misjudgment can be valuable to people in business/entrepreneurship. If they were unable to convince you, I'm not sure I can.

h34t 19y ago

Also -- in response to the thought experiment: For me to "apply Munger's theory of misjudgment in this startup to make it better" would basically entail putting myself in that startup's environment, probing the situation to get a sense of what's going on, and then using all the "mental models" or "thinking tools" I've got (including a lot of stuff about human misjudgments which seem to be really useful and accurate a lot of the time) to understand their situation & think of what could be done in new and better ways. I don't believe that the best way to solve most problems is by using formulas that are so overcertain of themselves that they presume to be able to solve someone else's problems from a distance, without knowing the details of a situation or interacting in that environment. I believe that details matter, as does close interaction with the environment that sustains your project.