Scan barcode
aranthe02's review against another edition
1.0
I came to this book hoping to get a little more insight into the work of Tversky and Kahneman; instead I was treated to needlessly complex prose, poor layout, gee whiz logic and a final paragraph that was completely uncalled for and leaves me baffled as to the author's motives.
The book starts off well enough, Piatelli-Palmarini begins with some simple examples of how we, as humans, can fool ourselves. However, this is also where I began to see the problems that would come to plague this book: the writing style felt stilted and overly complex. Bits of logical, connective sentences seemed to be missing. On his second example, part of the reason became clear, The author put some of this information in an appendix at the back of the book. This forces you, the reader, to constantly flip to the back for every little detail. After a bit, this became annoying.
While the appendix provided the missing links, it did not help the writing style. Perhaps something was lost in the translation, but so many times I had to go back over the sentence to be sure I read the author correctly. This was not just language usage, but general logic was left out. This became really clear in the author's description of Bayes. So much was left out that I feel an unfamiliar reader will leave the book with an incomplete understanding. In fact, for almost all the cognitive illusions, I feel the reader will leave missing some of his points, or worse, find his arguments so obtuse, that she will discount the entire field. This is both dangerous and a disservice.
What's worse, the author spends nearly 7% of the book attacking one man, Gerd Gigerenzer. Additionally, the author tends to be completely dismissive of anyone who doesn't completely agree with him. When you are talking about cognitive issues, speaking in absolutes will come back to bite you. It also sets off all of my warning flags. This is someone with an ax to grind; not someone who is hear to teach.
The final paragraph though is the one that sealed the deal for me. He, out of no where, attacks biological evolutionists! Now granted there is some field or question on adaptation, but to dismiss almost an entire field, well, that takes a lot. It also makes me suspect the author's ability to think critically.
The book starts off well enough, Piatelli-Palmarini begins with some simple examples of how we, as humans, can fool ourselves. However, this is also where I began to see the problems that would come to plague this book: the writing style felt stilted and overly complex. Bits of logical, connective sentences seemed to be missing. On his second example, part of the reason became clear, The author put some of this information in an appendix at the back of the book. This forces you, the reader, to constantly flip to the back for every little detail. After a bit, this became annoying.
While the appendix provided the missing links, it did not help the writing style. Perhaps something was lost in the translation, but so many times I had to go back over the sentence to be sure I read the author correctly. This was not just language usage, but general logic was left out. This became really clear in the author's description of Bayes. So much was left out that I feel an unfamiliar reader will leave the book with an incomplete understanding. In fact, for almost all the cognitive illusions, I feel the reader will leave missing some of his points, or worse, find his arguments so obtuse, that she will discount the entire field. This is both dangerous and a disservice.
What's worse, the author spends nearly 7% of the book attacking one man, Gerd Gigerenzer. Additionally, the author tends to be completely dismissive of anyone who doesn't completely agree with him. When you are talking about cognitive issues, speaking in absolutes will come back to bite you. It also sets off all of my warning flags. This is someone with an ax to grind; not someone who is hear to teach.
The final paragraph though is the one that sealed the deal for me. He, out of no where, attacks biological evolutionists! Now granted there is some field or question on adaptation, but to dismiss almost an entire field, well, that takes a lot. It also makes me suspect the author's ability to think critically.
juanpablo_85's review against another edition
4.0
This was a great book! Whether you have experience with statistics (mind you it isn't a book about statistics) it'll make you think. It concerns what Massimo calls, & what I think is in cognitive science officially called (not sure) mental tunnels, how we make decisions, good & bad, & how we make them often in an irrational manner. It has a lot to do with probability & demonstrates a lot of the ways we think about things that often seem sound initially or on the surface, genuinely aren't. Some examples are a little difficult to wrestle with & others are ridiculously simple in hindsight after things become more obvious. Definitely recommend for anyone interested in the way the mind works, logic &/or probability.
"Rationality is not just 'a' faculty we possess; it is not a spontaneous characteristic of our species. What is proper to our species is our capacity to discover on our own certain striking internal contradictions & to refute them. It is also part of our capacity as humans that we possess the basic elements from which we can construct & refine rational thought. Thus, from what we have been exploring here is nothing to lead us to either pessimism or optimism. Using our reason means being straightforwardly realistic. We seek to recognize our limits, to understand the geography of our minds, to elaborate normative theories of rationality, & to improve our judgments-- in the light of these theories, & employing a better awareness of our natural limitations."
"Rationality is not just 'a' faculty we possess; it is not a spontaneous characteristic of our species. What is proper to our species is our capacity to discover on our own certain striking internal contradictions & to refute them. It is also part of our capacity as humans that we possess the basic elements from which we can construct & refine rational thought. Thus, from what we have been exploring here is nothing to lead us to either pessimism or optimism. Using our reason means being straightforwardly realistic. We seek to recognize our limits, to understand the geography of our minds, to elaborate normative theories of rationality, & to improve our judgments-- in the light of these theories, & employing a better awareness of our natural limitations."
henrik_w's review against another edition
4.0
Most people are familiar with term "optical illusion". One well-known example is the picture of two equally long lines, but one has arrow-heads at the end turned inward, while the other has arrow-heads turned outward. The arrow-heads make the lines appear to be of different lengths. They look something like this:
<------->
>-------<
However, most people are NOT aware that there are similar mental illusions that affect how we make decisions. This book describes what researchers have found in this field in the last decades, and it is a very interesting read.
For example, there is an effect called framing, which means that the way a question or a problem is phrased has a large impact on how we answer it. In an experiment, doctors were told that when using a certain medical procedure, the probability that the patient is alive two years later is 93%.
Another group of doctors were told that with another procedure there was a 7% chance of the patient dying within two years. Both groups of doctors were asked whether they would recommend the procedure or not. Significantly more doctors would recommend the procedure as stated in the first case than in the second, even though the two cases are identical! This shows how powerful the framing effect is.
Another example: A wheel is spun, giving a number from 0 to 100. After seeing the number, people are asked to estimate the percentage of African nations that are part of the UN. If the number on the wheel was high, people give a high estimate of the percentage, if low a low estimate is given, even though people know that the number on the wheel has nothing to do with the actual percentage. This mental illusion is known as anchoring.
There are many more mental illusions discussed in the book, and there are lots of entertaining (and revealing) examples. I found the book very interesting and informative, and it has made me look out for mental illusions in my own decision making.
It is also interesting to note that it doesn't always help to be aware of a certain illusions - you can still be fooled by them. This is analogous to how the lines above still seem to be of different lengths even though we know that they are not.
My one criticism of the book is that the language is a little bit difficult and sometimes it doesn't flow as well as it could. But this is a minor problem. Also, there is a similar book that concentrates on mental illusions when it comes to money. It is called "Why Smart People Make Big Money Mistakes" by Belsky and Gilovich, and is also highly recommended, even though a lot of the material they cover is the same as in this book.
<------->
>-------<
However, most people are NOT aware that there are similar mental illusions that affect how we make decisions. This book describes what researchers have found in this field in the last decades, and it is a very interesting read.
For example, there is an effect called framing, which means that the way a question or a problem is phrased has a large impact on how we answer it. In an experiment, doctors were told that when using a certain medical procedure, the probability that the patient is alive two years later is 93%.
Another group of doctors were told that with another procedure there was a 7% chance of the patient dying within two years. Both groups of doctors were asked whether they would recommend the procedure or not. Significantly more doctors would recommend the procedure as stated in the first case than in the second, even though the two cases are identical! This shows how powerful the framing effect is.
Another example: A wheel is spun, giving a number from 0 to 100. After seeing the number, people are asked to estimate the percentage of African nations that are part of the UN. If the number on the wheel was high, people give a high estimate of the percentage, if low a low estimate is given, even though people know that the number on the wheel has nothing to do with the actual percentage. This mental illusion is known as anchoring.
There are many more mental illusions discussed in the book, and there are lots of entertaining (and revealing) examples. I found the book very interesting and informative, and it has made me look out for mental illusions in my own decision making.
It is also interesting to note that it doesn't always help to be aware of a certain illusions - you can still be fooled by them. This is analogous to how the lines above still seem to be of different lengths even though we know that they are not.
My one criticism of the book is that the language is a little bit difficult and sometimes it doesn't flow as well as it could. But this is a minor problem. Also, there is a similar book that concentrates on mental illusions when it comes to money. It is called "Why Smart People Make Big Money Mistakes" by Belsky and Gilovich, and is also highly recommended, even though a lot of the material they cover is the same as in this book.