The Pursuit of Happiness

Last year, I read "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman. I liked the book a lot, so apparently I talked quite a lot with my colleagues about it because my team made me a birthday gift. They bought me another book by Daniel Kahneman, "Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment". In this article, I would like to sum up the books and also list a couple of related videos on biases, noise, and misconceptions in general.

"Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman (https://youtu.be/CjVQJdIrDJ0) is a groundbreaking analysis of human behavior in decision-making, judgment, and behavior. It describes two systems that drive the way we think: System 1 and System 2 (I know it sounds lame, but he argues, in the book, that he doesn't want to bias the reader by some more fancy expressions). System 1 operates automatically and quickly, relying on intuition and heuristics. It's the rapid-fire, intuitive system that helps us make split-second decisions without much conscious effort. On the other hand, System 2 involves more deliberate and analytical thinking, requiring focused attention and effort. Kahneman describes various psychological experiments and related misconceptions by outlining real-world examples, showcasing how these two systems interact and often conflict. He reveals the inherent biases and errors that can arise in our thinking processes, leading to irrational decisions.

One of the key concepts in the book is the dichotomy between the "experiencing self" and the "remembering self." Kahneman demonstrates how our memories often shape our perceptions more than the actual experiences themselves, influencing the choices we make. Memories tell us stories of our experiences, and the way a story ends can affect how we remember the entire experience. This part is highly interesting, especially in the context of happiness, which I will focus later in this article. This idea is explained in more detailed in these videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgRlrBl-7Yg, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4piJGDft3zs

The book also explores the concept of "Prospect Theory", shedding light on how people evaluate potential losses and gains. The theory is based on the understanding that individual risk behavior varies depending on the perceived certainty of an occurring event. Kahneman's insights have profound implications for fields such as economics, psychology, and decision science, providing valuable lessons for individuals and organizations alike. "Thinking, Fast and Slow" is not just a scientific exploration; it's a practical guide for understanding and improving decision-making. By being aware of the biases and cognitive pitfalls outlined in the book, readers can enhance their critical thinking skills and make more informed choices in both personal and professional contexts (at least I hope so).

In "Noise," the authors extensively explore the concept of unwanted variability in judgments, referred to as noise. They explain that despite decision-makers having the same information, notable inconsistencies in judgments arise, leading to the phenomenon of "noise." Drawing on examples from law, medicine, and business, the authors illustrate how noise significantly influences decision-making processes in both individual and group judgments, underscoring its profound impact on fairness and efficiency. Decisions and judgments are prone to various forms of noise.

Noise comes in three main types: level noise, pattern noise, and occasion noise. Level noise refers to variability in judgments or decisions that arises from differences in the standards or criteria used by decision-makers. It occurs when individuals apply different thresholds or benchmarks when making assessments or evaluations.

Level noise can lead to inconsistencies in decision outcomes when decision-makers are presented with the same information. For example, assume a group of teachers is grading the same set of student essays. However, each teacher has a different standard for what constitutes an "A" essay. Some teachers may grade more favorably, while others may grade more strictly. As a result, the same essay could receive different grades depending on the teacher, illustrating the presence of level noise. Pattern noise is the differing and person-specific reactions of human resources professionals to the same factual situations in the context of personnel selection.

Pattern noise arises primarily when conflicting information needs to be weighed and evaluated. The subjectively coherent narrative then depends heavily on the individual preferences and values of decision-makers. Judges, for instance, can view different criminals differently. One of them would be more severe in case A, and the other would be more severe in case B based on certain patterns, e.g., prioritizing polite behavior instead of sticking to the facts.

Occasion noise refers to variability in decision outcomes that arises from situational or contextual factors specific to each decision-making occasion. It encompasses temporary influences or fluctuations in decision-making processes, such as mood, time pressure, weather, time of day, or the recent performance of a local sports club. Occasion noise can lead to inconsistencies in judgments or decisions, as decision-makers may respond differently to the same information depending on the circumstances.

The authors describe the effect of "naive realism." Naive realism refers to the belief that we perceive the world as it truly is, and that others perceive it the same way. This belief can lead to the assumption that disagreements stem from others not understanding the truth, rather than acknowledging differing perspectives. In decision-making contexts, naive realism can exacerbate noise by fostering a lack of appreciation for diverse viewpoints. Individuals may discount or ignore alternative perspectives, leading to a narrower range of considerations and an increased likelihood of errors. Moreover, the assumption that one's perception is the objective reality can hinder effective collaboration and problem-solving efforts, as it discourages open-mindedness and constructive dialogue.

The book also addresses the fact that these errors also come from the misconception that correlation implies causation, cautioning against interpreting chains of events as meaningful without considering predictability.

The authors argue that models or heuristics, based on relevant variables, can improve decision-making because they are not influenced by noise. This provides some practical tips for noise-free decision-making in a professional context. Several independent opinions, when properly brought together, can be remarkably accurate, for instance. But the social context also shapes decisions, as seen in scenarios where a small group contemplates a bold new initiative, and the order in which advocates or skeptics express their views influences the outcome. The book emphasizes that even weak social influences can lead to herd behavior, challenging collective wisdom.

But even in cases where independent opinions are not available, thorough contemplation and self-criticism (arguing against oneself) can improve decision-making and reduce noise. A particular thinking cycle is shown to be successful: trying, analyzing, correcting, and trying again.

In comparison to Kahneman's prior work, "Thinking, Fast and Slow," "Noise" offers an additional perspective on decision-making challenges. The book prompts readers to acknowledge and mitigate the impact of noise, providing practical insights for individuals and organizations aiming to improve the quality of their judgments.

Despite having deep extensive knowledge about noise and biases, my overall sentiment remains that reducing noise and making better decisions seems highly challenging. Noise and biases are deeply integrated into our human minds. Awareness and understanding alone do not necessarily lead to better decisions. This makes me think about this video of Richard Feynman: https://youtu.be/px_4TxC2mXU

In case you are nonetheless interested in understanding thinking errors, logical fallacies or biases, I can recommend checking out the following Youtube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYYkRaU0xh8, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G1F1KVeiNA, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCg-SNOteQQ, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SbV1jN12RY

Michael Stevens from the YouTube channel Vsauce published some episodes several years ago, covering the topic where self-perception does not align with behavior.

In the episode "Conformity" (Mind Field, Season 1, Ep. 2, https://youtu.be/fbyIYXEu-nQ?si=S8R9NJFVCGWw7GgE) the "The Asch Conformity Experiments" are analyzed. The Asch experiment probes conformity, exploring if individuals yield incorrect answers due to social pressure. The experiments are unveiling the influential nature of social forces shaping actions and beliefs. Conformity, acting as social lubrication, also poses risks when it clashes with personal beliefs or values. The study emphasizes the delicate balance individuals strike between societal expectations and authenticity, underscoring the intricate interplay between conformity and the preservation of personal values and convictions.

The episode "Freedom of Choice" (Mind Field, Season 1, Ep. 2, https://youtu.be/lmI7NnMqwLQ?si=0iEXAKtVCXoB83bk) debunks our belief in free will. Our lives are replete with decisions seemingly made of our own volition, yet external influences can subtly guide our choices. The abundance of options often complicates decision-making, and an excess of similar choices might even induce a state of "choice paralysis." Despite our preference for options, there are instances where fewer choices may contribute to greater happiness. Notably, our perception of free choice can be swayed by the pervasive influence of mass media and advertising.

Further episodes deal with implanting fake memories (Mind Field, Season 1, Ep. 8, https://youtu.be/b2ng8HuPLTk) or faking happiness (Mind Field, Season 1, Ep. 7, https://youtu.be/WY0j1cZtnp0). Other seasons also describe other dilemmas, e.g., "The Trolley Problem" (Mind Field, Season 2, Ep. 1, https://youtu.be/1sl5KJ69qiA?si=PC3kKgCMG6Q420kz) or the dark side of human psychology, "The Stanford Prison Experiment" (Mind Field, Season 3, Ep. 4, https://youtu.be/KND_bBDE8RQ?si=JLCiYBH8wGYy_nnj). If you aren't familiar with Michael Stevens' videos, here is a selection of my favorite videos he has made over the years. Especially the misconceptions about time are mind-blowing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjfaoe847qQ&list=TLGGu1MbjE-LoycyMzAzMjAyNA

Derek Muller also identified cognitive biases. In the video "The Illusion of Truth," https://youtu.be/cebFWOlx848?si=Lm1_4f7ZLrnp_gr3) he investigates, that repeated exposure leads individuals into accepting falsehoods as truths. In the realm of cognitive psychology, the concept of cognitive ease serves as a metric, measuring the intensity of the brain's effort in information processing. Truthful information aligns seamlessly with cognitive ease, reflecting the brain's natural processing mechanisms. Tangible elements like high-contrast images, crisp audio, and legible text are contributors to the creation of cognitive ease. This intriguing phenomenon extends beyond human experiences; even animals can establish associations, linking a repeated tone to a sense of safety through exposure. The cognitive ease concept becomes a key player in explaining why individuals exhibit a tendency to judge things more favorably after repeated exposure.

In the video "The Most Common Cognitive Bias" (https://youtu.be/vKA4w2O61Xo?si=e3u1TWl7WC7fDdt1), a challenge is presented to a group: discern a rule governing a sequence of three numbers. Participants propose number sets, receiving "yes" or "no" responses. While many assume the rule involves multiplication by two, the content creator encourages a more strategic approach to the problem. Eventually, the group discovers that the rule is the numbers must appear in ascending order. The content creator then relates this exercise to the scientific method, highlighting the importance of disproving theories to arrive at the truth.

The scientist Dan Gilbert analyzed the psychology of your future self, which is heavily influenced by misconceptions (https://youtu.be/XNbaR54Gpj4?si=je60RP5FIeeBjDvG). People have a fundamental misconception about the power of time, leading to decisions that are often regretted. The "end of history" illusion causes people to believe that they have recently become the person they were always meant to be and will remain that way for the rest of their lives. Gilbert's research shows that people vastly underestimate how much they will change over the next decade, including personal values, personality traits, and basic preferences. Understanding the potential for future change can help people make better decisions and avoid regret.

Gilbert also investigated why humans make bad decisions (https://youtu.be/c-4flnuxNV4?si=VuxyJI_AqBebf_Zt). The expected value of an action is the product of two things: the odds that the action will allow us to gain something, and the value of that gain to us. People are often bad at estimating both of these things, leading to errors in decision-making. Human minds recall information based on quick and easy mental shortcuts rather than accurate probability estimation (coming back to Kahnemans System 1). If humans could accurately estimate the expected value, it would lead to better decision-making in life.

Daniel Gilbert (https://youtu.be/fle_FkILmEQ?si=ax4nmBCikwnfLyb2) also outlines, that humans make bad decisions because our brain is not a general, all-purpose computer that rationally determines how it should respond to threats, but a specialized machine that evolved to solve a very specific set of problems. When threats look like those faced by our ancestors, we respond swiftly and with great force. However, when they don't, we find it hard to care. We care when a threat has four essential features that our brains evolved to respond to: intentional, immoral, imminent, and instantaneous. The human brain has a specialized network devoted to understanding other human minds, including thoughts, feelings, intentions, plans, and ambitions. This network helps us respond to threats that are intentional. Our brains also respond to threats that are immoral, such as terrorism, and threats that are imminent and instantaneous. However, if a threat does not fit these attributes and is therefore not intentional, immoral, imminent, or instantaneous, it makes it hard for our brains to care and take action.

I rediscovered Gilbert in my research related to the work of Kahneman, but I realized that I had read some articles from him almost 20 years ago. He was presented as a "happiness researcher" when I encountered him for the first time. He also has very interesting insights regarding happiness and misconceptions around it.

In a further talk (https://youtu.be/6dArDQYFjC4?si=kyO-NujTdMFA02sG), Dan Gilbert discusses the concept of happiness and why it's such a difficult thing for humans to understand and achieve. He states that for most of human history, happiness was not considered a secret, as life was difficult and people were simply trying to survive. However, with the advent of the Agricultural, Industrial, and Technological Revolutions, large numbers of people on the planet now have everything they want but are still not happy. The problem, according to Gilbert, is that people often want the wrong things, and this is due in part to problems with imagination and socialization. Our minds make predictable mistakes when we try to imagine what will make us happy, and the wisdom of our cultures is sometimes wrong. Gilbert explains that the human brain is unique in its ability to imagine the future and plan for it, but this ability can also lead to mistakes. He concludes that we need to be aware of these mistakes and work to overcome them if we want to be truly happy.

Daniel Gilbert also held a talk about "The Pursuit of Happiness", where he clearly outlined that we humans don't know what makes them happy. The video gives a wide range of misconceptions. The first thing he points out is that we underestimate the amount of change over our entire lives (https://youtu.be/6dArDQYFjC4?t=732). Secondly, he points out that cultures don't always know where happiness lies (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dArDQYFjC4&t=1566s) and he explains misconceptions about marriage, money, and children (https://youtu.be/6dArDQYFjC4?t=1616). Dr. David G. Myers, another researcher who analyzes the pursuit of happiness scientifically, extended this analysis to the field of faith and religion (https://youtu.be/y3huf9nArhY?t=2590).

If we want to break it down to one single factor, Daniel Gilbert (https://youtu.be/fq9v6nGmHQc?t=789) and also Derek Muller (https://youtu.be/vSQjk9jKarg?si=47U0E6zrCw4W0sr2) can trace it down to good personal relationships. This was also invested in by the "Harvard Study of Adult Development," which has followed over 2,500 people since 1938 to understand the key factors that lead to a happy life. Robert Waldinger, the current director of the ongoing project, sums it up in the following videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KkKuTCFvzI, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IStsehNAOL8 According to the study, quality relationships are vital for our well-being, contributing to both happiness and physical health. Strong social connections act as stress regulators, safeguarding against the detrimental effects of isolation and loneliness. The impact of good, warm connections goes beyond mere emotional support, as they also play a role in maintaining physical strength and cognitive capacity as we age. Whether with family, friends, or new acquaintances, having at least one person who supports us is crucial for our overall happiness and health. The value lies in the quality, not quantity, of our relationships, emphasizing that investing in meaningful connections is the key to a fulfilling and well-rounded life.

A way to structure our social universe, as described in another video by Mr. Waldinger (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yyDf5PcG_g), is to organize our relationships in a 4-quadrant framework (By the way, this also shows the 2x2 framework which I recently explained: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/thinking-boxes-andreas-spenninger-ek6mf?trackingId=dm52T2X4TtKAigVGU1ks7A%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3B7LHTS%2FOcQX%2Bk0WQ8N%2FgCVA%3D%3D). One axis represents how frequently, or infrequently we meet, and the second axis represents how energizing or depleting, the interaction is. Therefore, we can figure out where important people fit, and might make changes in our relationships. Loneliness is growing as an epidemic in society, especially due to changes such as the digital revolution (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxbYPk1MIyw). Loneliness is as dangerous to health as it is pervasive. Those who are lonely can learn social skills and revise their assumptions about not being wanted by others. To combat loneliness, find a setting or activity around other people where one is comfortable, and make gestures that say, "I would like to connect".

Olivia Remes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZT-bB66iIk) outlined the danger of loneliness as well. Loneliness has profound implications, potentially leading to depression, early mortality, and Alzheimer's disease. Paradoxically, despite technological advancements connecting us, loneliness is on the rise. To address this, a fundamental shift in our worldview is necessary. Key strategies to get rid of loneliness are to speak with as many people as possible on a daily basis, and to take up a new hobby. Opportunities to meet people can be found in our daily routines. Engaging in a small conversation or asking questions about a person's background can lead to new connections and friendships. People would describe me as introverted, for example, but I managed to build a great network in the last 10 years, which I am serenely proud of.

Besides loneliness, other traits can have an effect on our happiness. Nat Ware (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KiUq8i9pbE) outlines that we are unhappy when our expectations of reality exceed our experience of reality. This means when our imagination doesn't fit reality, we compare ourselves with others, or we ruminate and compare ourselves with our own past.

David Steindl-Rast (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtBsl3j0YRQ) explains, that gratitude is the key to happiness. Living gratefully involves being aware of every moment. By recognizing that every moment is a gift, individuals can become grateful for the opportunity to live and experience life, even when faced with difficult circumstances.

Derek Sivers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHopJHSlVo4) describes that having a personal goal is important for motivation. But telling someone about your goal makes it less likely to happen. Sharing your goals may reduce your chances of achieving them, as acknowledgment can trick the mind into a false sense of accomplishment. I put it here because archiving goals is a key to happiness because it gives me the feeling of making the most out of my limited time. According to Sivers, it's crucial to delay gratification and be cautious when discussing goals, ensuring that the conversation doesn't undermine your motivation. Talking is not the same as doing.

Well, now we have come a long way from misconceptions due to noise and biases to happiness and goal-setting. I don't have a good way of closing this article. It seems difficult to live a life while being aware of all those factors that might lead to wrong decision-making and actions. But there is some hope that, by knowing more about them, we can make better decisions and hopefully also be happier.

A full playlist of all videos in this article (excluding the Vsause playlist) can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjVQJdIrDJ0&list=TLGGzEKRrclpHJsyMzAzMjAyNA

PS: Thank you all for the great birthday present. I am grateful working with you!