Loved this, David! A quote I heard from Jason Zweig WSJ, in his being gobsmacked about his conversations with Kahneman said something like ... "he has no sunk costs." If he's been working on something for a while and it turns out not to be the thing, or he has new information he has no problem giving up the ghost and moving on.
That's been incredibly helpful to me not just in business but in sports, relationships and in general living my life.
I want to be right. It's nice to be right. But I don't care about being right.
Great piece David, it reminds me of a Richard Dawkins story: "A formative influence on my undergraduate self was the response of a respected elder statesmen of the Oxford Zoology Department when an American visitor had just publicly disproved his favourite theory. The old man strode to the front of the lecture hall, shook the American warmly by the hand and declared in ringing, emotional tones: ‘My dear fellow, I wish to thank you. I have been wrong these fifteen years.’ And we clapped our hands red. Can you imagine a Government Minister being cheered in the House of Commons for a similar admission? “Resign, Resign” is a much more likely response!"
Well done. If I had written a book that was read by Daniel Kahneman, I would have a lot of trouble not getting a bit cocky and casually dropping that fact into every conversation I had. I also think that it says a lot about Daniel in that he didn't just, "stay in his lane, " as far as academics and research go. He seemed to be curious about everything. I also took some wisdom from him when he said/wrote that he was always happy to find out when he was wrong, so that he could change his mind.
This is excellent. I just wanted to share that I think we live in a society, generally speaking, that praises and values being right above everything else. So, it has become extremely difficult to find people who just accept and admit: "I was wrong about this". The fact that anyone is wrong about something, does not invalidate their work. It takes courage to admit, when you made a mistake or, you changed your mind with new information. I hope more people follow Daniel Kahneman's example and start accepting when something about their work was wrong or simpler could have been stronger. We need it in these complicated times.
Daniel Kahneman's research and together with your conversation with him, it is always a mindset that grows in intellect, in learning- all i can think of this is the art of subtle unlearning and relearning. That's the greatest thing- sometimes with logic, stats and sometimes something as profound as transcendental as love - with mankind and humanity. Our choices and reseach can be followed by the -throw a rock on the lake and see the ripple effect. The effect he left on us. Flip the coin in the air and deep down we would know what we ve to make a decision off. Love reading your newsletter.
Hey David, this is a beautiful tribute to a true legend. I read Thinking, Fast and Slow during the early days of the pandemic, I also read Range around this time, probably my 2 favourite books and definitely 2 that impacted my thinking more than any other. I've since read Noise which I also enjoyed, it's very different to Thinking, Fast and Slow but still a very interesting concept. That story is quite something! Prepping for lunch.. 'That's a thing' haha.. it must have been such an honour to have been contacted by the great man, especially as a young author, for someone of his standing to take an interest in your work is quite something! And that's a lovely memento to have! (the signed paper). I'd love to know did you speak to him about Range? I would bet that he would really have enjoyed it. I actually have had that thought before so it is great to know that you connected and stayed in touch. And as for the lesson, what a wonderful, humble message, if such a legend of the psychological field is willing to change his mind, then why wouldn't anyone be willing to. Loved this one David, thanks.
"Social priming results, it turned out, were too good to be true, and researchers simply weren’t publishing their failed results. It left a body of work that appeared consistently convincing."
At this point I was waiting for you to mention Abraham Wald and his survivorship bias observation at the Statistical Research Group. 😉
You might be interested the "Real Science of Sport Podcast" from 3/13/24--Can We Trust Sport Science Research? Ross Tucker brings up both the "underpowered study" problem and the misleading tendency of sports science journals to favor articles with Click-bait headlines over negative results on the same topics.
This is so admirable. Every time you write about someone who has passed, I appreciate the personal and unconventional angles you take. Also, between Kahneman's passing and the news of the NAIA's ban, I was wondering if one or both of these would make its way into Range Widely. I have read so many people argue that this is the appropriate way to respond to mistakes, but it's so much more powerful to actually see someone do it. Especially someone who is successful enough that they could get away with ignoring everyone! Now this has me wondering, and I'm curious if you'll entertain me with a prediction or two. Is there anything you have a hunch that we might all soon learn that the science's current consensus is wrong?
Love your piece and Kahneman's "lesson I have learned"! I'm currently on chapter 3 of his book. I guess I'll be going into chapter 4 with a different mindset. :) Btw, “representativeness” reminds me of "search images" in vision.
Ah, another one of my intellectual heroes (along with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and Anders Erickson) that I won’t be able to meet in person. Thanks for giving us a chance to share your experience vicariously, David. If only we can become a “the lesson I have learned” kind of society.
some sort of scale of phase needs to be added to loss aversion discussions, where the loss brings you closer to zero proportionally than the gain takes you away from zero (the differences between famine, fasting, and jam money). Growth in investements in stock markets is a relatively recent phenomena, whereas drought and plagues of mice, locusts and bacillae make all growth seem like fantasies. Avoid loss is more likely to let you survve, whereas the extra bucks simply allows you to accept an upsale without detriment.
Loved this, David! A quote I heard from Jason Zweig WSJ, in his being gobsmacked about his conversations with Kahneman said something like ... "he has no sunk costs." If he's been working on something for a while and it turns out not to be the thing, or he has new information he has no problem giving up the ghost and moving on.
That's been incredibly helpful to me not just in business but in sports, relationships and in general living my life.
I want to be right. It's nice to be right. But I don't care about being right.
Great piece David, it reminds me of a Richard Dawkins story: "A formative influence on my undergraduate self was the response of a respected elder statesmen of the Oxford Zoology Department when an American visitor had just publicly disproved his favourite theory. The old man strode to the front of the lecture hall, shook the American warmly by the hand and declared in ringing, emotional tones: ‘My dear fellow, I wish to thank you. I have been wrong these fifteen years.’ And we clapped our hands red. Can you imagine a Government Minister being cheered in the House of Commons for a similar admission? “Resign, Resign” is a much more likely response!"
Well done. If I had written a book that was read by Daniel Kahneman, I would have a lot of trouble not getting a bit cocky and casually dropping that fact into every conversation I had. I also think that it says a lot about Daniel in that he didn't just, "stay in his lane, " as far as academics and research go. He seemed to be curious about everything. I also took some wisdom from him when he said/wrote that he was always happy to find out when he was wrong, so that he could change his mind.
This is excellent. I just wanted to share that I think we live in a society, generally speaking, that praises and values being right above everything else. So, it has become extremely difficult to find people who just accept and admit: "I was wrong about this". The fact that anyone is wrong about something, does not invalidate their work. It takes courage to admit, when you made a mistake or, you changed your mind with new information. I hope more people follow Daniel Kahneman's example and start accepting when something about their work was wrong or simpler could have been stronger. We need it in these complicated times.
Daniel Kahneman's research and together with your conversation with him, it is always a mindset that grows in intellect, in learning- all i can think of this is the art of subtle unlearning and relearning. That's the greatest thing- sometimes with logic, stats and sometimes something as profound as transcendental as love - with mankind and humanity. Our choices and reseach can be followed by the -throw a rock on the lake and see the ripple effect. The effect he left on us. Flip the coin in the air and deep down we would know what we ve to make a decision off. Love reading your newsletter.
Absolutely beautiful.
Thank you for taking the time to write this up. What an example of maturity and a mindset I want to emulate.
Hey David, this is a beautiful tribute to a true legend. I read Thinking, Fast and Slow during the early days of the pandemic, I also read Range around this time, probably my 2 favourite books and definitely 2 that impacted my thinking more than any other. I've since read Noise which I also enjoyed, it's very different to Thinking, Fast and Slow but still a very interesting concept. That story is quite something! Prepping for lunch.. 'That's a thing' haha.. it must have been such an honour to have been contacted by the great man, especially as a young author, for someone of his standing to take an interest in your work is quite something! And that's a lovely memento to have! (the signed paper). I'd love to know did you speak to him about Range? I would bet that he would really have enjoyed it. I actually have had that thought before so it is great to know that you connected and stayed in touch. And as for the lesson, what a wonderful, humble message, if such a legend of the psychological field is willing to change his mind, then why wouldn't anyone be willing to. Loved this one David, thanks.
"Social priming results, it turned out, were too good to be true, and researchers simply weren’t publishing their failed results. It left a body of work that appeared consistently convincing."
At this point I was waiting for you to mention Abraham Wald and his survivorship bias observation at the Statistical Research Group. 😉
You might be interested the "Real Science of Sport Podcast" from 3/13/24--Can We Trust Sport Science Research? Ross Tucker brings up both the "underpowered study" problem and the misleading tendency of sports science journals to favor articles with Click-bait headlines over negative results on the same topics.
This is so admirable. Every time you write about someone who has passed, I appreciate the personal and unconventional angles you take. Also, between Kahneman's passing and the news of the NAIA's ban, I was wondering if one or both of these would make its way into Range Widely. I have read so many people argue that this is the appropriate way to respond to mistakes, but it's so much more powerful to actually see someone do it. Especially someone who is successful enough that they could get away with ignoring everyone! Now this has me wondering, and I'm curious if you'll entertain me with a prediction or two. Is there anything you have a hunch that we might all soon learn that the science's current consensus is wrong?
Love your piece and Kahneman's "lesson I have learned"! I'm currently on chapter 3 of his book. I guess I'll be going into chapter 4 with a different mindset. :) Btw, “representativeness” reminds me of "search images" in vision.
Great piece David!
Thanks so much!! Excellent info update, and great food for thought.
Ah, another one of my intellectual heroes (along with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and Anders Erickson) that I won’t be able to meet in person. Thanks for giving us a chance to share your experience vicariously, David. If only we can become a “the lesson I have learned” kind of society.
Love this essay. Thanks for writing it!
some sort of scale of phase needs to be added to loss aversion discussions, where the loss brings you closer to zero proportionally than the gain takes you away from zero (the differences between famine, fasting, and jam money). Growth in investements in stock markets is a relatively recent phenomena, whereas drought and plagues of mice, locusts and bacillae make all growth seem like fantasies. Avoid loss is more likely to let you survve, whereas the extra bucks simply allows you to accept an upsale without detriment.