Thinking that we Know

I highly recommend watching this video: Daniel Kahneman on the Trap of ‘Thinking That We Know’.

I’ve read Kahneman’s books on behavioral economics, one titled “Choices, Values, Frames” which is collection of fundamental texts and articles on the discipline authored with Tversky, as well as “Advances in Behavioral Economics” which discusses recent ground breaking progress in the field.

Behavioral economics is a fascinating subject. Although it’s interesting to explore the intersection of economics and psychology, I’m really interested in how sociology (institutional structures) shape the psychology of individuals. That is, how it is people develop values and frames of reference a priori to any choice or decision. There is no such thing as an individual psychology. Every person develops their psychology as a result of their environmental influences, so these are undoubtedly socialized behaviors, but I would like to explore which institutional influences possess the greatest sway, be it through  a perceived authority or an actual power.
In the aforementioned video lecture, Kahneman elaborates on the nature of perceptual systems at work in our conscious experience, which psychologists break down into system 1 and system 2. In brief, System 1 is characterized as producing intuitive, concrete, emotional, and immediate associations; while System 2 is characterized by inferential, abstract, cognitive, and delayed associations.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.