12 ms·
Daniel Kahneman has died
- nonrandomstring 3y ago"people [are] endlessly complicated and interesting."
- paulpauper 3y agowow ..didn't realize he was so old .He was always on the tips of people's tongues, never seemed old or dated or faded away even at 90. He was at his peak intellectual influence or trajectory, which is uncommon for someone so old; most careers peak at 40-60. Not only that, his reputation fully unblemished and unmarred, which is also increasingly uncommon.
- paulpauper 3y agoIt's hard to think of any public intellectual whose career was on the peak of its trajectory as his was, and at such and advanced age. Usually someone has a few ideas and they fade with time, but not him. The neoclassical assumptions had crashed after 2008 and this guy comes along with his books and upends the whole economics establishment.
- FabHK 3y agoThe Chicago School was criticised not only by behavioural economists and psychologists, though, but also by other (fairly orthodox, eg New Keynesian) economists [0]. This is not to distract from Kahneman's monumental contributions (many together with Tversky, as narrated in the book The Undoing Project by Michael Lewis). [0] see e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06Economic-t.html https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06Economic-t.htm...
- bwestergard 3y agoPerhaps Stiglitz, who similarly undermined faith in core neoclassical assumptions?
- toomuchtodo 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman https://kahneman.scholar.princeton.edu/ https://kahneman.scholar.princeton.edu/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/obituaries/2024/03/27/daniel-kahneman-dead/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/obituaries/2024/03/27/daniel-... | https://archive.today/tZY2w https://archive.today/tZY2w ("The Washington Post: Daniel Kahneman, Nobel-winning economist, dies at 90") https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-27/daniel-kahneman-psychologist-who-upended-economics-dies-at-90 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-27/daniel-ka... | https://archive.today/MpDes https://archive.today/MpDes ("Bloomberg: Daniel Kahneman, Psychologist Who Upended Economics, Dies at 90")
- OliverJones 3y agoLet us not forget his collaborator, Amos Tversky, who died young in 1996, and who certainly would have been a co-prize-winner had he lived.
- zug_zug 3y agoI'm not one to give an exaggerated eulogy nor rhapsodize about all those "Books with a white cover and a weird picture" -- but I will say I read thinking fast and slow for the first time last year, after decades of resisting, and felt it covered some generally profound ideas that still are relevant as ever and not widely understood. (Though at some point, maybe the 2nd half of the book, drags on and you can skip most of those chapters. If you don't have time for that, I'm sure chat GPT can give you a taste of the main premises and you can probe deeper from there.)
- mistercow 3y agoIt’s worth noting that many of the results in Thinking, Fast and Slow didn’t hold up to replication. It’s still very much worth reading in its own right, but now implicitly comes bundled with a game I like to call “calibrate yourself on the replication crisis”. Playing is simple: every time the book mentions a surprising result, try to guess whether it replicated. Then search online to see if you got it right.
- zug_zug 3y agoYeah I wouldn't read too much into any single study. But what I would defend vigorously is System1 / System2 distinction as something so clear/fundamental that you can see it constantly once you understand it.
- disgruntledphd2 3y agoThat's not him though. Like, it was in all my cog psych textbooks more than twenty years ago, with cites back in the 80s (which weren't him). This is my favourite paper of theirs: http://stats.org.uk/statistical-inference/TverskyKahneman1971.pdf http://stats.org.uk/statistical-inference/TverskyKahneman197... I got into a bunch of trouble with some reviewers of my thesis for referencing this repeatedly.
- gattilorenz 3y agoIt’s also very common in psychology theories, I haven’t read “Thinking, fast and slow” but I imagine there’s more than Kahneman’s own papers cited: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_process_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_process_theory
- John23832 3y agoWow. I was just looking him up yesterday to see if he had written anything else. Sad. Be blessed.
- jarcoal 3y agoDamn, I’m reading Thinking Fast and Slow right now. RIP.
- zebomon 3y agoThinking Fast and Slow made a tremendous impact on me when I read it (multiple times) in the 2010s. What curiosity and what clarity of thought this man had. His influence will continue to be felt!
- misiti3780 3y agoMe too, I think a bunch of it was found to be reproducible though. https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/30/a-meta-scientific-perspective-on-thinking-fast-and-slow/ https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/30/a-meta-scientific-pe... Same thing is happening w/ a lot of the work of Dan Ariely, but I think his situation is much worse.
- yodon 3y agoDupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39840447 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39840447
- dredmorbius 3y agoFYI, that's been redirected to this post: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39841183 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39841183>
- micah94 3y agoI remember years ago Penn Jillette talking about his book "Thinking Fast and Slow". And I was like why is a magician talking about a book written by an economist?? Well, read it and you'll understand why it fits so well with their brand of magic. Dr. Kahneman expresses in words what's going on in your brain while watching someone like them perform.
- astrodust 3y agoThere's a lot of "magic" in that book where your pre-conceptions are completely subverted.
- bumby 3y agoFWIW, I believe Kahneman resisted being categorized as an economist and preferred to think of himself as a psychologist.
- dredmorbius 3y agoThere's a school of thought which holds that economics is a subset of psychology. I'd thought that this was reflected in some university departmental organisation, with M.I.T. being the one that came to mind. Despite there being a behavioural economics section there, though, so far as I'm aware Economics remains its own department. Kahneman's training and primary focus were both in psychology, but he was awarded the somewhat problematic Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Multi-discipliniarity is in fact A Thing. Princeton bio: Daniel Kahneman is Professor of Psychology and Public Affairs Emeritus at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs.... He has been the recipient of many awards, among them the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award of the American Psychological Association (1982) and the Grawemeyer Prize (2002), both jointly with Amos Tversky, the Warren Medal of the Society of Experimental Psychologists (1995), the Hilgard Award for Career Contributions to General Psychology (1995), the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences (2002), the Lifetime Contribution Award of the American Psychological Association (2007), and the Presidential Medal of Freedom (2013). <https://kahneman.scholar.princeton.edu/ https://kahneman.scholar.princeton.edu/>
- 3y ago
- fastandslow 3y agoFantastic book - I certainly had to read it slowly, not fast. Two things bothered me about it though - firstly, it landed shortly before the reproducibility issues of such research became more widely known. Secondly - towards the end of the book, it espouses the idea that using some methods of psychlogical and behavoural manipulation is at worst a net neutral, especially if there was nothing to see of the manipluation in question. After all, who can argue against organ donation being opt-out by default, or similar? To me, this is like a magician claiming that there was no sleight of hand, as we were free to look wherever we liked during their performance. Denying the presence and capabailities of tools of manipulation is, in my opinion, incredibly dangerous, and the worst of its outcomes has been very publicly played out in recent years.
- nonrandomstring 3y agoWhat the eye doesn't see the heart doesn't grieve, as they used to say in the pie factory where I worked. But the belly knows. Yes, it's a dangerous, cavalier idea. But from an endlessly complicated and interesting thinker.
- Retric 3y ago> some methods of psychlogical and behavoural manipulation I think you may be objecting to the idea of manipulation here rather than his point. Influence is not necessarily bad, if a dentist notices some poster which causes his patients to floss more shouldn't he keep it up? Suggesting all manipulation is bad implies we shouldn't do public health education etc if it happens to be effective.
- fastandslow 3y agoBut it never stops at "this thing we want to encourage is obviously good with absolutely no downsides". After all, floss is a single-use plastic, generally made of PTFE, the production of which requires all sorts of nasty forever chemicals.
- Retric 3y ago
- fastandslow 3y agoFantastic book - I certainly had to read it slowly, not fast. Two things bothered me about it though - firstly, it landed shortly before the reproducibility issues of such research became more widely known. Secondly - towards the end of the book, it espouses the idea that using some methods of psychlogical and behavoural manipulation is at worst a net neutral, especially if there was nothing to see of the manipluation in question. After all, who can argue against organ donation being opt-out by default, or similar? To me, this is like a magician claiming that there was no sleight of hand, as we were free to look wherever we liked during their performance. Denying the presence and capabailities of tools of manipulation is, in my opinion, incredibly dangerous, and the worst of its outcomes has been very publicly played out in recent years.
- roguecoder 3y agoI think the argument is whether or not we admit we are having these effects and take responsibility for them, we are doing them. I personally find that telling people exactly what I intend to do makes it more effective rather than less. But in a field where we can change people's behavior by making a button orange instead of blue or presenting a form in one page vs three, I find it impossible to pretend that one of those is a neutral choice. Instead, I focus on what it is we are maximizing for, and how people feel about the experience. I push my companies to choose patterns that help people feel secure & in control, leading to predictable outcomes that align with what they actually expressed wanting. It means we are collaborating with our users, even though we could have used those same techniques to make them feel more anxious, spend more money than they intended, or buy things they didn't actually need.
- dinp 3y agoThe idea of system 1 and system 2 had a profound impact on me. While specific conclusions in the book were reported to be based on low quality data, it doesn't take away from the fact that it gave me a new mental lens to look at things and understand people's behaviour.
- Swizec 3y agoIf you’ve only read Thinking Fast And Slow, try grabbing a copy of his 2021 book Noise. It’s a little drier but I found it to be a much deeper and more insightful read. Less pop sci, more hard research results. And if I recall correctly he addresses the replication issues from Thinking Fast And Slow and discusses more recent research that disproves or adds nuance on the older studies. I think it’s also more practically useful and applicable to everyday life. Where TFS gives you a “these are interesting facts about life” vibe, Noise is more “here’s the problem and this is what you can do about it” style.
- _aleph2c_ 3y agohttps://archive.md/tZY2w https://archive.md/tZY2w
- suriyaG 3y agokahneman was such a fascinating personality. Other than "Thinking fast and slow", I highly recommend "The Undoing Project" by Michael Lewis about Kahneman and Tversky's incredible journey changing the standard economic theory. Some interesting talks with Daniel Kahneman - https://www.edge.org/adversarial-collaboration-daniel-kahneman https://www.edge.org/adversarial-collaboration-daniel-kahnem... - https://replicationindex.com/2017/02/02/reconstruction-of-a-train-wreck-how-priming-research-went-of-the-rails/#comment-1454 https://replicationindex.com/2017/02/02/reconstruction-of-a-... Kahneman himself reponds in the comment sections to a very critical piece about his work.
- FabHK 3y agoSad that Tversky, despite being younger, predeceased him by nearly 3 decades.
- abirch 3y agoDon't forget "Noise" it was a great read and great bridge between "Thinking Fast and Slow" with "Nudge"
- UncleMeat 3y agoNudge is based on a significant amount of messy science and smuggled policy preferences. It has also not really borne out via the policy initiatives started based on its concepts.
- richrichie 3y agoDoes behavioral economics offer an alternative theory with useful predictions? Like, do we have an option pricing model that holds up better than models coming out of standard theory?
- DrFalkyn 2y agoThose option pricing models (mostly) work because everyone uses them. Because (almost) everyone is convinced they work. Convince everyone to use a different model and it will work.
- COGlory 3y agoI'm not an economist nor that interested in them, but I did read Nassim Taleb's books* and Kahneman stuck out as one of very few economists Taleb doesn't totally trash. * I had read Eugene Koonin's "The Logic of Chance" and was then recommended Taleb's books for a more thorough perspective on probability, to apply to Koonin's work.
- mgfist 3y agoNassim Taleb's opinion of others shouldn't hold much sway - the man is a prick.
- inglor_cz 3y agoTaleb really has a high opinion only of himself. A very smart man, but also very self-absorbed.
- vik0 3y ago>Taleb really has a high opinion only of himself That's not true though. I can name at least two other people on whom he has a high opinion (a.k.a he's praised them in his books): Karl Popper and George Soros. There are others as well, but most people here will recognize these people (I assume) so that's why I mentioned them, and admittedly they were the first to pop into my head lol It's true that he's an asshole on X and in his books, while in real life he seems very nice and non-confrontational. He's talked about this in an interview he did with the Guardian I think a few years ago (maybe a decade ago), and if my memory serves me right, he said something to the tune of it being easier to get lost when you're not speaking directly to someone's face and become more rude than usual
- zengid 3y agoI thought he was so witty and refreshing when I read AntiFragile (which I will always regard as a masterpiece), but I feel like he's ran out of ideas now and is just complaining about people he doesn't like.
- COGlory 3y ago
- FergusArgyll 3y agoGreat interview Tyler Cowen did with him. https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/daniel-kahneman/ https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/daniel-kahneman/
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- throwfast 3y ago[flagged]
- rasse 3y agoHe truly had that rare combination of gifts for formulating and expressing ideas clearly.
- kqr 3y agoAmong all the praise for Thinking, Fast and Slow it seems that many people have missed out on Noise. Also a fantastic book that shaped how I approach situations perhaps more than the former. Kahneman was one of those people where I was just waiting to have a problem tough enough that I'd have a good reason to email him with a question, whether or not I'd get a response. I guess no longer.
- mgfist 3y agoFeel like I'm the only one who couldn't get through Thinking, Fast and Slow. Felt like a rambling slog, with most of the interesting bits being something that was very common sense to me.
- arrowsmith 3y agoI had the same reaction tbh. I managed to get to the end, but it was a slow, tedious slog. And maybe it's because I'd already read a lot of other pop-psych books, but I barely felt like I learned anything new from it. That aside, I don't doubt that Kahneman was a brilliant mind, and I'm saddened by his passing. RIP.
- xutopia 3y agoWhen did you read the book? It seems to me that the ideas within the book now pervade culture in ways that it didn't when it first came out. If you read it recently it could contribute to your feeling of this being common sense. Also because this idea feels like common sense doesn't mean that it was. Evolution is common sense now but it was a revolutionary way to think of species when On The Origin Of Species came out.
- vik0 3y agoYup, exactly this
- yodsanklai 3y agoI couldn't finish this book. It felt like a never-ending stream of examples to illustrate a few simple ideas.
- passion__desire 3y agoI remember one quick reply of Kahneman when Sam and Daniel were discussing about intuitions and how people are wrong many times. Sam Harris jokes, "I have met these people". Daniel replies, "We have met them and we see them in mirror" [0] [0] 17:25 @ https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/150-map-misunderstanding https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/150...
- Shrezzing 3y agoKahneman's impact on economics can't be understated. The subject was becoming a fairly absurd and dogmatically prescriptivist practice before Kahneman stirred it up along with a a relatively small number of colleagues. To a large extent, it's still dogmatic and prescriptivist, but unorthodox opinions (not just limited to behavioral economics) are more accepted & considered following Kahneman's input.
- kolbe 3y agoOut of both humility and reality, I think even Kahneman would give the bulk of the credit to Amos Tversky.
- worik 3y ago> The subject was becoming a fairly absurd and dogmatically prescriptivist practice That was when I was studying it! So much rubbish "economics is a science because it uses maths" is one favourite of mine. I did over a decade of study on economics and finance and nobody, even once, mentioned Karl Marx, arguably the most influential economist in the last two hundred years. It was very prone to fetishes. "Price mechanism" was one I recall. Every problem in society had to be shoe horned into a market so the "price mechanism" would get to work.
- dougSF70 3y agoHe was nudged off his mortal coil too soon.
- graphe 3y agoHis life is filled with tragedy, like his father dying in Vichy France and his wife preceding his death. Imagine living forever where everyone you know and love dying before you.
- wolverine876 3y agoThe death of reason.
- sonorous_sub 3y agoI always felt I got more mileage out of the reflexivity of Popper, by way of Soros.
- mattpavelle 3y agoFor those who don't know who he is: Professor Kahneman, who was long associated with Princeton University and lived in Manhattan, employed his training as a psychologist to advance what came to be called behavioral economics. The work, done largely in the 1970s, led to a rethinking of issues as far-flung as medical malpractice, international political negotiations and the evaluation of baseball talent, all of which he analyzed, mostly in collaboration with Amos Tversky, a Stanford cognitive psychologist who did groundbreaking work on human judgment and decision-making.
- ipsum2 3y agoAll of this is in the article.
- radu_floricica 3y ago"advance" and "groundbreaking work" is far from enough. Those two basically invented a couple of new sciences. "Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases" is the paper that made them famous, and it's still a damn good read: https://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~schaller/Psyc590Readings/TverskyKahneman1974.pdf https://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~schaller/Psyc590Readings/TverskyK...
- narnarpapadaddy 3y agoYes, two new sciences. To those criticizing his work: I’m not saying the magnitude of the impact is the same, but have all of Darwin’s ideas about evolution stood the test of time? Clearly not. Each of us sees the world through our own sets of biases. None of us is immune. Any of us that can see clearly enough to move humanity’s body of knowledge forward even a smidgen is a rarity and a treasure. Even among that group this man (and his collaborators) did more than most. I don’t believe _I_ will be counted among those. I can’t fault Kahneman for making some mistakes. Finding and fixing those is part of the process, and requires others with a different set of perspectives and biases. At a future date, weighed against his contributions, I believe they will appear relatively small.
- whyenot 3y agoI used to play D&D after school with Tal Tversky and Jon Barwise at the Tversky's Eichler home on the Stanford campus. This was in the early 1980s. I had no idea how famous either of my friend's fathers were (or would become). It's sad how young both of their parents were when they died.
- randombetch 3y agoHe's a legend! His book made me question my every thought for a while D:
- coyotespike 3y agoAlthough many of the results in Fast and Slow didn't hold up, Kahneman was always refreshingly open and honest about that, and keen to identify the limits of knowledge. Which surely is one of the best things you can say about a scientist.
- mxs6 3y agoI was fortunate enough to take a cognitive psych grad seminar from him in the 90s, co-taught by his wife, Anne Treisman. He always seemed given to thinking a little more deeply in the moment than most people do. One half-joking comment he made about science in the real world vs some idealized notion of it has always stuck with me. In a discussion about whether the results of some paper conflicted with some model or theory of cognition, he mused that scientific progress in psychology (and other non-hard sciences) was really about embarrassing rivals with competing models. No high-level model was ever stated precisely enough to rule out some particular finding; you could always tweak your theory a little to accommodate it. It's just that at some point, you might be too embarrassed to do so.
- rvbissell 3y agoLet's call those tweaks epi(stemological)-cycles.
- trash_cat 3y agoI did a Cog Sci bachelor and this is the conclusion I made I finished my studies. A lot of Thinking Fast and Slow are summaries of research done in the field over decades. In particular, biases and intuition as internalized knowledge/expertise. Sure you can complain about replication issues but this is the best model when it comes to minds that I know of.
- ignoramous 3y ago> He always seemed given to thinking a little more deeply in the moment than most people do. "As soon as you present a problem to me, I have some ready-made answer. Those ready-made answers get in the way of clear thinking, and we can’t help but have them." – Daniel Kahneman
- emeril 3y agofrom the article: "Then the students were asked which was more likely: that Linda is a bank teller or that Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement. The vast majority went with bank teller and active feminist, which has to be the less likely choice because the probability of two conditions will always be less than the probability of either one." Isn't that a bad question to ask, it suggests there are only two possible outcomes, wouldn't a better question include a third option of "not a bank teller and may or may not be a active feminist"?
- istultus 3y agoMaybe your (anyone's) system 1 might assume only two possible outcomes, but it's not in the question - it's which is more likely, and one option assuredly is, up to a less-than-or-equal sign.
- emeril 3y agoI hope the actual study wasn't as "tricky" as it was referenced in the article re: the Linda example I'd imagine there's enough stuff Kahneman identified with biases that have held up and don't involve artificial questions like this designed to trick the respondents whose real world applicability seem questionable at best... further, in the supplied example, I'd argue that the prior probability of Linda being a feminist (based on her being an activist/etc.) is probably higher than her not being a feminist so, in a sense the respondents got it right (i.e., in that population, I'd argue there are more women who are bank tellers and feminists than just bank tellers)...
- kristianbrigman 3y agoIt’s mathematically impossible for the set of things who have both properties X and Y, to be larger than the set of things that have property X.
- lupire 3y agoYes. You've noticed that most psychological insights and paradoxes are actually linguistic ambiguities. But it's more fun to ignore that.
- kabigon 3y agoCan we ban paywalled WP articles?
- cynicalpeace 3y agoFascinating quote I found on his wikipedia page: "It must have been late 1941 or early 1942. Jews were required to wear the Star of David and to obey a 6 p.m. curfew. I had gone to play with a Christian friend and had stayed too late. I turned my brown sweater inside out to walk the few blocks home. As I was walking down an empty street, I saw a German soldier approaching. He was wearing the black uniform that I had been told to fear more than others – the one worn by specially recruited SS soldiers. As I came closer to him, trying to walk fast, I noticed that he was looking at me intently. Then he beckoned me over, picked me up, and hugged me. I was terrified that he would notice the star inside my sweater. He was speaking to me with great emotion, in German. When he put me down, he opened his wallet, showed me a picture of a boy, and gave me some money. I went home more certain than ever that my mother was right: people were endlessly complicated and interesting."
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mugivarra69 3y agorip
- aj_nikhil 3y agoR.I.P a true genius.. hope people discover him now..
- orsenthil 3y agoRest in Peace, Ms. Kahneman. May strength be with your family and loved ones. Your Thinking Fast and Slow was an influential book.
- UIUC_06 3y agoKahneman was a giant among men. Anyone rattling on about "the replication crisis" probably isn't fit to carry his folders.
- bobse 3y ago[dead]
- ashton314 3y agoFor me the best part about reading Thinking: Fast and Slow is that I'm more distrustful of my own thought processes. That little bit of questioning of my own conclusions has helped me see gaps in my reasoning. My dream is to one day have the caliber of insights this man had, along with his ability to express them so clearly and persuasively. dang, does this deserve a black bar?
- AceyMan 3y agoas an owner of my softbound copy of TF&S I was surprised there wasn't one here already. (I saw the WSJ article drop the minute it posted, as a subscriber.) RIP, Prof. K.
- vik0 3y agoMay he rest in peace
- resource_waste 3y ago[flagged]
- amai 3y agoAbout his book: https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/30/a-meta-scientific-perspective-on-thinking-fast-and-slow/ https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/30/a-meta-scientific-pe...
- deadbabe 3y ago90 years old, the most common age of death these days.
- roughly 3y agoI'd second every recommendation in this thread for "Thinking Fast And Slow" - it's one of those books that gives you a concept that has such immediate salience that it feels like it unlocks some part of reality you didn't see before but is totally obvious in retrospect. One of the few other books that's changed my thinking about my thinking in similar ways is Annie Murphy Paul's "The Extended Mind" - https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-extended-mind-the-power-of-thinking-outside-the-brain-annie-murphy-paul/17058771 https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-extended-mind-the-power-of-... . It's hard to put anything at the level of Thinking Fast and Slow, but it felt like reading a sequel to that book.
- ivoflipse 3y agoLearned Optimism has a similar style of explaining the author's work over many years in an accessible manner
- tonymet 3y agoLots of praise for this man. He was obviously very influential. His theory enabled the broad paternalistic state we are all suffering from today. Too many policy makers read his book and thought they could tax every person into "good" behavior. That's way beyond the scope of how governments should be involved. Now that "soft paternalism" has been so successful, the same policymakers are pivoting into hard paternalism . I learned a lot from Thinking Fast and Slow, but it's also a cynical book. In the same vein as Skinner's behavioralist view of people. Principles must always come first.
- ls612 3y ago“Should” matters little in politics and war. What works for power will be done regardless of your morals. This is how the world works.
- 7thaccount 3y agoThis is one reason why I feel like economics is still in its infancy and I find a lot of policy recommendations are built off ideology rather than actual reality. That doesn't stop people from being very confident though about their statements. I understand that sometimes you need assumptions to make the math work, but the fact that it took so long for behavioral economics and bounded rationality to be recognized is crazy. Just because the math is convenient doesn't mean people work that way at all. I say this as someone who has taken a lot of econ classes, so I understand its value, but it is still very much a set of principles and ways of thinking about problems involving people, rather than something as exact as it's made out to be. I got slightly off topic here, but seeing as how Daniel got the nobel prize in 2011 (pretty recent) and the work occurred in the 70s, it made me think again about how young the field is.
- jcutrell 3y agoI have a standing offer to buy any individual any of Kahneman's books, if they commit to me they will read it. Amazingly only a few people have taken me up on this. Kahneman is unequivocally the person I would call my hero, today I am sad to see him leave us. I hope to honor his memory by... I guess, recognizing just how wrong I am, on a regular basis.
- profsummergig 3y agoKahneman's "add one" / "add three" exercise is his recommended way to activate System 2. If anyone has figured out how to do it using one's phone, please share. There used to be an App on Google Play store but it doesn't work on more recent versions of Android. I created a Spreadsheet based random 4-digit number prompter, which isn't bad, but I'd like better ideas if anyone has any.
- arduanika 3y agoOne of a kind! A life that will never be replicated.
- dorianmariefr 3y agois it me or the washington post making money off obituaries kinda weird?
- arduanika 3y agoOnly insofar as it's "kinda weird" to run a service where you notice interesting new things that happen in the world, and then write professional, mostly-reliable words about them, to share with your general audience. In past centuries, this was a fairly common business model, but I understand the concept sounds pretty jarring to modern ears.
- mehdix 3y agoFor me, among other things, Thinking, Fast, and Slow cracked the implicit notion that my intuition is always right by demonstrating how easily it could go wrong. RIP Daniel Kahneman.
- 1_over_n 3y agoI wrote Daniel an email once from a personal (non-academic) account once as I felt like there was something meaningful to discuss, though I didn't expect a response. He did indeed reply, and seemed remarkably down to earth and genuine considering he was something of a rockstar in pop-sci/psych. RIP.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jonesn11 3y agoNO NO NO NO NO !
- eimrine 3y agoIs Daniel Kahneman the only Psychologist who has received the Noble?
- isuckatcoding 3y ago[flagged]
- kwar13 3y agoI met him while I was studying at Berkeley. Not only he helped upend the long-held notion of "rational economics", he was also a great person to meet!
- jonesn11 2y agoThe best psychologist of all time has died. RIP
- TedHerman 2y agoI first became aware of a type of "slow thinking" through the book "Hare Brain, Tortoise Mind: How Intelligence Increases When You Think Less", by Guy Claxton, published 1999. Does anyone have a comparison of the types of slow thinking?
- topologie 2y agoMet the man in person, had a really long chat with him. Made me realize how he truly was one of the smartest people alive at the time. Really sad news...
- jonnycosgrove 2y agoFantastic impact, probing society to think, about their thinking. RIP.