However, there was so much meat on the bones in that intro that I returned the book to the library already in order to spend time pondering what he has to say.
Basically, he says the evidence is that when people draw quick conclusions (intuitive?) they are thinking heuristically. By this he means that we leap to conclusions ("fast thinking") based on a personal probability based on our own personal experiences. In other word, if the only "Joe" 's you know are plumbers then when you hear about someone named Joe you assume he is a plumber until proven otherwise. If you are thinking "slowly" (nonheuristically) then you would, of course, know that most Joe's are, in fact, not plumbers and not leap to that conclusion.
This has me thinking about very well prepared, smart physics students who do poorly on conceptual multiple choice questions yet can correctly solve a long, difficult mathematical physics problem that uses those same concepts. Could it be "fast" thinking on the multiple choice leads them to fall into a cognitive trap made of their own prior misconception and naive intuition about phenomena they have not experienced whereas on the longer, mathematical problems they go into "slow" thinking and use process-oriented thinking rather than heuristic mapping?? Cool...
I have to think about his some more...
No comments:
Post a Comment