Thanks for the copy/paste, it summarises exactly what I was hoping to get from the article. > Readers of “Thinking: Fast and Slow” should read the book as a su

Thanks for the copy/paste, it summarises exactly what I was hoping to get from the article. > Readers of “Thinking: Fast and Slow” should read the book as a subjective account by an eminent psychologists, rather than an objective summary of scientific evidence. Like with most pop science, they may give you useful models that can help you analyse and reflect on your personal experience, but shouldn't be seen as ground truth. Unless you read the science (and the science is good!) you're probably not enough of an expert to differentiate distilled truth from diluted truth.