Psychology Today: The Benefits of Being a Slow Thinker
“A theoretical framework for fast and slow thinking is provided by a famous dual-process model. Nobel-prize winning economist Daniel Kahneman and his longstanding colleague Amos Tversky proposed that thinking usually activates one of two cognitive systems.”
“System 1 is a fast and intuitive approach, which is often ruled by emotional responses, habits or instincts. It has the advantage of generating fast solutions but is typically prone to common decision biases and reasoning errors.”
“System 2 describes a slow and deliberative approach, which includes analytical reasoning and more conscious reflection on different options. It has the advantage of yielding more purposeful and accurate results but is also associated with the cost of higher cognitive effort.”
“Which system is better: fast or slow? In colloquial language, the adjective “slow” often comes with negative connotations. We may even use it to describe someone with less-than-average intelligence.”
“…In reality, most people use a combination of System 1 and System 2 approaches, with the context determining which system is dominant. The relative importance of a task and the amount of time available to make a choice are amongst the factors influencing how you think.”
“With this in mind, we may have to re-phrase our initial question. Rather than trying to identify the better thinking style, the challenge appears to be one of finding balance. Knowing when to think fast and when to think slow might be the real game changer for increasing efficiency and overall success.”
Read the full article here.
#Cognition #ThinkingSystems #Bias
My Take:
I feel like I’ve nearly always been something of a hybrid-thinker between those two listed approaches. And as the article says, I feel like which approach I use is largely predicated on the context of the situation requiring my mental cognition.
And as a question for you all:
Which approach to thinking (or maybe both?) do you all find yourselves identifying with, right off-the-bat?
@sereneSunset26
Very interesting!
Thank you for spreading these valuable ideas based on hard experimental science, but with down-to-earth conclusions so relevant to everybody
At my best, I am a "fast" thinker for day-to-day living and change gears to a "slow" systematic analysis for significant decisions.
I have also made important decisions the "fast" way, resulting in some disastrous mistakes.
That's why these teachings are so important...
I wholeheartedly recommend reading the book "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman. It's long but a relatively easy read. Well worth every minute invested in it. It is also available as an audiobook.
HERE is its page of reviews on Goodreads.
@HealingTalk
Thank you for your kind words as well as your book recommendation; I may just have to add it to my Kindle. :)
@sereneSunset26 I'm a slow thinker because I take time to think about all the aspects of a certain thing. The only con is that it takes a lot of time.
@comfortableNight4463
I certainly understand the time investment of slow thinking; just play me in Scrabble sometime! Lol. I say that as a joke, but I definitely *do* take my time when I am trying to parse something out.
@sereneSunset26 I usually am a really fast thinker, but I have to agree with @HealingTalk when it comes to significant decisions. I like to think about all the possibilities of a decision being made and to weigh my options. Otherwise, my mind goes a thousand miles a minute!
@fruityPond7887
I'm in a similar boat with both of y'all on that one. Sometimes I'll even meditate to intentionally slow down my brain/thinking when I'm dealing with something particularly stressful.
@sereneSunset26 I am really glad you have that coping skill to help you relax and allow yourself to think through a situation before deciding on anything! I need to learn a thing or two from you! Thank you for sharing!
@sereneSunset26
I'm a slow thinker.
@seashell145
I can certain identify with you there; I have my moments that way myself.
@sereneSunset26 I'm definitely a slow thinker
@mytwistedsoul
And, you know, sometimes that is honestly for the best approach - especially with bigger life decisions.
@sereneSunset26 Which approach to thinking (or maybe both?) do you all find yourselves identifying with, right off-the-bat? Nothing, I have dementia.
@Offmytrack
I am sorry; that is beyond rough.
Dementia is something that I am likely to have to face down as it runs down both sides of my family.
If you don't mind me asking, how do you deal with (or manage) it?
@sereneSunset26 So far, my mind is clearing itself.
@sereneSunset26
Both cognitive systems unambiguously have their pros and cons depending on the situation. Notwithstanding, I believe a slow and analytical approach would be more practical and effective in most situations. Approaching situations logically and with reason will manifest a more relevant result.
However, I recognize the imperative nature of a quick and rash decision in many situations. I would view these types of situations as instances where the results arent as arduously achieved. Furthermore, these choices may not be as pertinent and a rash and inaccurate decision won't have a sizable impact.
Alternatively, there are also situations where a quick response may have huge consequences. This would be more applicable in scenarios of imminent danger where a quick choice could alter the situation positively or negatively.
Altogether, the largest factor pertaining to which system to implement is allotted time in any given situation. If time allows I would certainly argue a slow analytical approach is justified and most practical. Understanding the intricacies of both systems will ensure the most efficient and effective system is implemented.
@xOso
"Both cognitive systems unambiguously have their pros and cons depending on the situation. Notwithstanding, I believe a slow and analytical approach would be more practical and effective in most situations. Approaching situations logically and with reason will manifest a more relevant result.
Definitely agree with this; I feel like the more time we're able to put into this, in general, the more we'll get out/from whatever the task may be.
However, I recognize the imperative nature of a quick and rash decision in many situations. I would view these types of situations as instances where the results aren't as arduously achieved. Furthermore, these choices may not be as pertinent and a rash and inaccurate decision won't have a sizable impact.
Again, agreed.
Alternatively, there are also situations where a quick response may have huge consequences. This would be more applicable in scenarios of imminent danger where a quick choice could alter the situation positively or negatively.
And I think this is why these scenarios, for me, are intimidating. Because I know that I can keep my crap together in a tense situation, but it's the fallout from making the quick decision that probably worries me the most.
Altogether, the largest factor pertaining to which system to implement is allotted time in any given situation. If time allows I would certainly argue a slow analytical approach is justified and most practical. Understanding the intricacies of both systems will ensure the most efficient and effective system is implemented."
And definitely a great cap on the discussion here. :)
