3 ms·
Yes, that one. You exaggerate when you say that “most” of the book’s findings were undermined, but a good chunk of them were, including most of the principal fi
by leephillips 5y ago
Yes, that one. You exaggerate when you say that “most” of the book’s findings were undermined, but a good chunk of them were, including most of the principal findings of one of the chapters. And note that Kahneman had the integrity and objectivity to accept that he had been taken in by some non-replicable results, and has been totally clear, honest, and straightforward about what results that he described in his book are reliable and which should probably be discounted. Maybe he was too credulous when he wrote the book, but no one realized at the time how much of social psychology would collapse. He has provided a model of how an academic should react when faced with uncomfortable evidence.
- anitil 5y agoHis response to that blog is really impressive. It must be so hard to look at significant bodies of work that you've done and have to reevaluate it. Even more so when you're probably the most famous living figure in social psychology. I would hope that in the same circumstances I would do the same, but I can't honestly say that I would live up to that standard.