READ THIS IF…
- Curious ka kung bakit sikat ‘tong book na ‘to sa mga productivity gurus sa YouTube
- You appreciate endless explanations detailing countless studies and experiments from decades of research by a Nobel Prize winner author
Sa personal reading journey ko, yung non-fiction book na pinaka nag-cause ng mental strain sakin ay yung book ni Neil Postman na Amusing Ourselves to Death. Pero grabe ‘tong book na ‘to. Sobrang dense. Hindi ko kinakaya. Ang daming studies, experiments, statistics at word problems. Grabe talaga.
Nevertheless, eto yung mga natutunan ko sa librong ‘to:
System 1 and System 2
Our mind operates in two modes. System 1 yung immediate and automatic tapos yung System 2 yung slow and deliberate. To give an example, answer this question:
Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from zero at the bottom to 10 at the top. The top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. On which step of the ladder would you say you personally feel you stand?
Kung maganda yung mood mo, baka medyo mataas ka dun sa step. Pero kung bad mood ka, baka mababa yung step mo dun sa ladder. Baka mag-depend ka lang sa recent events. Yun yung System 1. Pero kung gagamitin natin yung System 2, you will try to examine everything from your childhood to present. Gano ba karami yung moments na okay ka at hindi. You will consider all aspects of your life. So taxing sya.
Pero parang wala naman nasabi sa book na one is better than the other. Sinasabi lang na minsan, mas paganahin natin yung System 2. Parang let’s be aware kung kelan ba natin sya dapat gamitin. Pero kahit mas reasonable si System 2, ang imposible din naman na yun lang lagi ang pairalin natin. Kaya hinay lang din.
As a way to live your life, however, continuous vigilance is not necessarily good, and it is certainly impractical. Constantly questioning our own thinking would be impossibly tedious.
Flow
But sometimes, may mga moments na continuous and nasa mood si System 2. Parang eto yung sinasabi na, “nasa momentum” ka. Na-eexperience ko ‘to when I draw. Yung hindi na ko makatigil. Yung masyado akong into what I’m doing. Yun daw yung tinatawag na flow.
People who experience flow describe it as “a state of effortless concentration so deep that they lose their sense of time, of themselves, of their problems…”
Feeling ko eto yung tinackle dun sa isang book ni Cal Newport na Deep Work. Looking forward na rin akong basahin yun.
Behavioral statistics are unreliable
Based on my opinion lang. Kasi ang dami nyang studies na prinesent tapos laging madalas yung conclusion is—yung sagot ng mga participants ay depende sa mood nila. So kung happy sila that day, most probably positive yung response nila sa questions.
Or yung isang experiment na papasagutan yung participants ng questionnaire about life satisfaction. Pero bago nila sagutan, may mga participants sila na inutusan na i-photocopy yung isang sheet of paper tapos nag-plant ng coin yung researchers dun sa tabi ng copying machine. Yung mga participants na may nakitang coin, mas positive yung response nila dun sa questionnaire. Siguro kasi nag-signify yung coin na feeling nila “lucky” sila. So mga ganun. Kaya parang ayoko nang maniwala sa mga types of survey na may behavior or feelings involved. At dahil dyan:
Consider some time in answering seemingly simple questions
Parang pag tinanong kung satisfied ba ko dito sa Canada. Kung ang unang pumasok sa isip ko ay malayo ako sa family ko, baka unang pumasok sa isip ko na sagot ay hindi masyado. Pero kung i-coconsider ko yung lahat ng aspects ng buhay ko, satisfied naman ako. Siguro personal struggle ko na rin ‘to kasi madalas kong natatanong ‘tong question na ‘to. Masyado kong nagf-focus sa iisang bagay lang. Parang sinasabi dito na be more rational. Wag masyadong puro feelings. So instead of instantly going with how we feel, let’s consider first what we think about it.
At medyo similar dito ay:
Eat before making decisions
Kasi daw pag gutom ka tapos pagod pa, most probably you will fall back to the easier or default response (System 1). They call it “cognitive ease”. So kung gusto mong makapagbigay ng sound judgment, kain ka muna. Pero same din daw ‘to pag sobrang saya natin. May chance din na maging biased yung decisions natin. Haha ang hirap naman. Ano ba talaga?😂
System 1 is gullible and biased to believe, System 2 is in charge of doubting and unbelieving, but System 2 is sometimes busy, and often lazy.
What you see is not all there is
May mga binanggit syang “availability bias” and “availability cascade”. So parang sinasabi dun sa book na wag masyadong dumepende sa kung anong nakikita mo lang sa balita kasi kung pagiisipan ng mabuti, sobrang liit or non-existent naman talaga yung risk.
Because of the coincidence of two planes crashing last month, she now prefers to take the train. That’s silly. The risk hasn’t really changed.
Speaking of news, kahit before pandemic pa. Eto talaga yung reason kung bakit ayokong manood ng balita eh. Puro patayan, gulo at rape na lang lagi (availability cascade). Kasi halos hindi naman binabalita yung magagandang nangyayari. So ang tingin natin tuloy sa mundo, magulo at delikado. Parang yun yung nangingibabaw na emotion satin: irrational fear. Kasi yun yung madalas na “available” sa mata natin.
Gruesome images, endlessly repeated in the media, cause everyone to be on edge. As I know from experience, it is difficult to reason oneself into a state of complete calm. Terrorism speaks directly to System 1.
Pero sobrang agree ako sa sinabi nya dito:
I share Sunstein’s discomfort with the influence of irrational fears and availability cascades on public policy in the domain of risk. However, I also share Slovic’s belief that widespread fears, even if they are unreasonable, should not be ignored by policy makers. Rational or not, fear is painful and debilitating, and policy makers must endeavor to protect the public from fear, not only from real dangers.
Isa pang naisip kong example yung sa pagsusugal. Pag nanalo ako 5 times in a row, yun yung nakikita ko—na “lagi akong panalo” or na “swerte ako”. So ang result, overconfident ako na mananalo ako ulit. Pero wala namang nagbago kasi same lang naman parati yung chance kung mananalo or matatalo ako.
…two important facts about our minds: we can be blind to the obvious, and we are also blind to our blindness.
Illusions can disrupt improvement
I think parang sinasabi dito na let’s take some time to sit down and just be brutally honest with ourselves and confront our weak points. For some reason nung nabasa ko ‘to, naisip ko na kaya siguro ang tamad ko sometimes ay dahil meron akong “illusions” na na-form sa isip ko. Pero kung pagiisipan kong mabuti, those illusions or perceptions are false.
These illusions are comforting. They reduce the anxiety that we would experience if we allowed ourselves to fully acknowledge the uncertainties of existence.
Isa pang example na binigay nya is yung illusion of predicting the stock market. Wala naman talagang makakapagsabi ng future. Kaya naisip ko na baka mag-invest na lang talaga kami sa ETFs.
The line that separates the possibly predictable future from the unpredictable distant future is yet to be drawn.
The question is not whether these experts are well trained. It is whether their world is predictable.
Sometimes it’s wise to just accept your losses
Nabasa ko ‘tong concept na ‘to sa The Psychology of Money ni Morgan Housel. Ang tawag is “sunk cost fallacy” or “sunk cost bias”. Again sa pagsusugal ulit. Yung alam mong talong talo ka na pero ayaw mo pa ring tumigil in the hopes of recovering from your losses.
And yung documentary sa Netflix na Fyre. Ang subtitle nya is The Greatest Party That Never Happened. Haha panoorin nyo yun. Yun talaga yung perfect example.
RATING [2.5 🌟]
So as mentioned earlier, super demanding nung book at nakakabobo. Dahil dyan, maaapektohan talaga yung rating ko kahit maganda yung information na gustong i-present nung book. Hindi lang talaga sya for me. For me mas maa-appreciate ko yung summarized version. But it wouldn’t be fair to ask the author to “dumb himself down” para lang ma-please yung mga taong katulad ko. It’s a lot to ask from a Nobel Prize winner. Gets ko sya. Feeling ko mas mahihirapan syang isulat ‘tong book kung i-shortcut nya yung mga concepts.
MORE QUOTES
Rationality is logical coherence—reasonable or not.
Beyond the satiation level of income, you can buy more pleasurable experiences, but you will lose some of your ability to enjoy the less expensive ones.
The easiest way to increase happiness is to control your use of time. Can you find more time to do the things you enjoy doing?
Click to view my digital bookshelf.
Gleniz Da Menace 