Skip to main content

How we think

The way humans think is different from how computers think. Our cognitive abilities are designed with certain flaws. One clear example of this is called “source monitoring” i.e. we can’t always remember the source of our information. A more important way in which our thinking is different from that of a computer is that our thinking process is often colored with emotion. To demonstrate this let me explain the two types of thinking humans are capable of:
1. Narrative thought
2. Propositional thought

Narrative thought is based on episodic memory, it has a story like aspect to it. For example when we think about going to a party we imagine ourselves there and ask “am I going to have fun?”, “who is going to be there?”. Such thinking unfortunately has the power of running over the facts of the situation. For example if you ask an average person whether traveling in a plane makes him more anxious than traveling in a car most people who know that the statistical chances of death in a car are higher than in a plane would still tell you that traveling in a plane makes them more anxious simply because the narrative of a plane accident is more scary.

Propositional thought is problem set kind of thinking, mathematical for example. For me writing code to make a “notepad application” would involve propositional thought not narrative thought. For example if you write down a problem on a piece of paper and “think it through” by taking out the “emotional” aspect of things and think in “realistic” terms the chances that you will arrive at a sound conclusion are higher. This then is “factual thinking”.

Examples of narrative thought vs. propositional thought

1. Politics: In the US presidential election one candidate could use the “employment statistic” to show how well the government’s policies were while the other candidate could use the example of one individual who was “wronged” by the system (as a fault more of his own more than that of the system) and leverage narrative thought for the buy-in of the voters.

2. Car vs. plane example: Riskier to travel in a car but more scared of traveling in a plane!

3. Lottery example: The probability of winning is next to impossible however the stakes are so high you still play. This is against propositional logic but one is lured by narrative thinking.

4. Marketing surveys: One should not use ‘loaded terms’ because you start to bias the reader because of his ability of narrative thought.

5. Socializing
A) One could leverage people’s “narrative thinking” abilities! Machiavelli would say: lure them by giving them half-truths, which is probably what Hitler did! He was the witch-doctor for the Nazis and gave them an integrated view that had flaws that people did not question!
B) Hazrat Ali would say: leverage from the power of eloquence based on truth! If one becomes articulate enough, if truth becomes clear to a person then he can do this.

Source: MIT Open Courseware, Introduction to psychology lecture on “How do we think”.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Explanation of the movie 'Revolver'

I saw the movie for the umpteenth time last night and I finally got it.

This is what the movie says:

1) In every game and con there is always a victim and there is always an opponent. It's good to know when you are the former so you can become the latter.

2) But the question is how do you prepare yourself for this game?

3) You only get smater by playing a smarter opponent.

4) The smarter the game the smarter the opponent

5) Checkers is an example of such a game. Chess is a better game. Debate is an even better opportunity to learn and so on.

6) But the question is where does the game stop? or one can ask what is the smartest game one can play?

7) The answer according to the movie is: "The game of con you play with yourself".

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The text below has been added on 3 Dec 2008 and is based on a comment posted on October 30, 2008, at time 4:12 PM. I have only recently understood what this person meant and it is …

What the journey means to me

My journey so far has been about discovering the meta rules of how the self works. The essence of what I have learnt is that the self can change and in fact does change every time it undergoes an experience. Where any experience is significant because of the meaning it carries for us. It means something to us by the fact: it changes our feelings from state (state a) to another state (state b). Where this movement between states is a process we can call witnessing.  The exercise of witnessing can be powerful and enriching.  In fact if we could communicate what we have witnessed through poetry or through prose, perhaps with the aid of metaphors, we could share these experiences with our family, friends and with the larger community. 
Thus to go in retrospect and search for meaning in the experiences we have had can help us grow mature, become stronger and make us more aware.

My Criteria for my marriage partner

1) She should be a home maker. 10 on a scale of 10
2) I should be able to fall in love with her and her with me … 7 on a scale of 10.

First criteria:

10 on a scale of 1-10 for this criteria because I consider my family my second self. The better my partner will be at making my family the best the better off my second self will be. Who doesn’t want to aim for the best? In accordance with this she should have the best of the characteristics that every home maker should have:

1) Intelligent
2) Practical
3) Ability to take stress and bounce back – agility of mind
4) High level of commitment
5) Principled
6) Caring
7) Want her children to be the best
8) Want to learn how to make her children the best

Of course there is an ideal woman out there who would rank very high in all these areas. But then I have to be practical too. I would want to marry the most ideal woman who is compatible with me. Compatibility is covered in the second criteria.


Second Criteria:

Description of scale:

5: passes the basic crite…