Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Book notes: Blink, Malcolm Gladwell

by Colman Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 05:22:55 PM EST

Seeing it billed as the "The Power of Thinking Without Thinking", my immediate reaction, ironically, has been to leave this book on the shelves in the book shop until now. It got bought as the third in a "buy three for the price of two" promotion.



blink

It's easily written and seems like a competent survey of our current state of knowledge of how we make snap decisions and what the strengths and limitations of the mechanism are. A few key points that stick in my mind after reading it.

The first is that we have a system in our brains that doesn't rely on factual knowledge to make decisions: it adds up what we see and hear and pattern matches it. Gladwell doesn't dwell on the mechanism or the evolutionary development of the system. I'd guess it's the more primitive decisions making system inherited from our predecessors as opposed to the much more bizarre one that depends on thoughts and language and rational evaluation. It's this system that gives us hunches and allows us to make snap decisions.

This system is trainable: experts can train themselves to improve the quality of their intuitions. It's also easily mislead: it can be primed with misleading patterns and it can be confused if faced with patterns it doesn't expect to find together.

Our ability to do intuitive summations is not only opaque to introspection - we can't work out why we know what we know - but is often destroyed by it.

The fourth point is that for some tasks, only our intuitions will do: the problem is either too complex for rational thought or simply not amenable to it.  (This, incidentially, is why it takes a lot of over-thinkers a long time to get into the whole dating/romance thing: rational analysis does not help you with relationships.)

In fact, maybe this all explains my difficulty with writing book reviews or whatever you want to call these things: I've read a lot of books and never really analysed how my likes and dislikes work. I liked the book and it's worth reading. I'm reading it in the context of a couple of other books on this sort of thing.

By the way, if you felt like buying this from Amazon the following link will earn referral fees for ET: Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking

Display:
Or there's lots of other Amazon links in the left-hand bar.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 05:26:00 PM EST
The hunch is a valuable tool since it allows the 95% of our brain that we don't have conscious access to do it's stuff. But it is only really valuable if the 95% part is already full unadulterated awareness.

But the key thing about the hunch - if you want to approach it consciouslessly - is stepping back and seeing any problem in context, and then  taking another step back to see the context in context and so on.

No problems are too complex, they are just seen too locally.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 05:58:54 PM EST
The global view can need to be awfully big ...
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 06:13:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course, but the problem gets simpler all the time.

Reread your Castenada

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 06:39:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Or Castañeda as the case may be.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 06:49:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It is my great pleausure to award Migu the 2006 Late Night sleepwalking PN award ;-)

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 06:52:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Sure, on the vowel switch. But ñ's are not PN'ing.

Tengo 50 años means "I am 50" but Tengo 50 anos means "I have 50 anuses".


Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 06:57:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:04:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How many anal orifices do you have?

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:06:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It depends how you classify piles

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:08:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
BTW I appreciate your use of the umlauts in Värttinä, but let's not get carried äwäy...

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:09:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I even know you are even supposed to umlaut all umlautable vowels in a word, or none of them.

By the way, you said you would post the answers to the Finland quiz some time soon? I'm curious.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:12:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If you open the diary again you will find the answers

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:25:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Not strictly true. As a rule of thumb, words containing 'e' or 'i' predict that an 'a' or 'o'  in the same word will be umlauted. However, due to the use of compound words, it is possible to have umlauted 'ä's combined with unumlauted straight 'a's.

'U' is only umlauted in words or surnames of Germanic origin. It is acceptable. but considered a little strange. 'Y' is the almost equivalent sound to 'ü'.
The great thing about Finnish pronunciation is that it is entirely predictable. There are no exceptions. If you know the basic 29 characters and their pronunciation - you can pronounce any Finnish word.

If a vowel or consonant is repeated, it is also pronounced.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:39:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So what is the difference between Castañeda and Castenda?

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:07:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What's the current roster of the order of the PN?

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:08:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Afew has awarded himself the highest honour, and, as you understand, this is a self-organizing merit system. Nomad is up in the higher echelons.

IMHO you could be Supreme Commander, should you so wish. But it's up to you.

We have had our spats here, and I put it down to different attitudes to humour. From my POV, I read everything you wríte - religiously - and I generally agree ( when I understand what you and Colman are talking about). I even agree when you get a bit uppity with idiots (including me).

But the edge between us might not be resolved until we meet F2F. which I hope will be sometime in August. Then you will find that I am not who I think I am, and you are not who you think you are. 8-)

Meanwhile our Dear Leader is away and we should play nice.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:24:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I may need coffee ...

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 03:38:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Picture credit to here.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 03:39:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But the edge between us might not be resolved until we meet F2F. which I hope will be sometime in August.

I have been told that the strictly enforced rule that Fencers must shake hands at the end of their bouts has the physiological basis that there is nothing like touching someone to reduce aggression.

The edge between us will evaporate as soon as we shake hands.

I do read everything you write, more or less, and like you I agree when I think I understand it.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 05:28:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'll be content with being Nightwatchman of the order of the PN. Afew can be Supreme Commander. Trond Ove took away his Chairmanship so he needs a job ;-)

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 05:30:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You should maybe explain a bit more about the referral fees. Is it a valuable method financially? Can we exploit this in other ways?

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 06:41:04 PM EST
It means if you click through to a purchase from this site, Amazon pays ET a (very small) percentage.

I know people who make a living running referral sites. Add a bit of consumer info and eye candy, and you don't actually have to sell anything - just turn your site into a clickthrough portal and rake in the percentages.

It needs a lot of traffic though, and wouldn't currently work for ET at this level.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 08:12:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Nah, but given the costs of running ET, which aren't all that large, every little helps.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 02:11:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In that case maybe an affiliate bookstore of Stuff We Think Is Cool, perhaps with mini capsule reviews explaining why?

I'm not sure how much work that would be to code or how much it would make, but if the site ever grew to the size of dKos it could turn into a useful financial sideline.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 09:34:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I thought Blink was a bit hand-wavey and superficial.

There's a lot of entertaining and occasionally useful information about practical psychology out there already, much of it related to instant people-reading, if perhaps not so much to instant decision making. But there's not much mention of it in Blink.

Even the point about experts doesn't seem all that interesting when you look at it more closely. So - you can train yourself to parse specific kinds of information very quickly? Okay - but considering the huge amount of time it seems to take to do this, for what is often a fairly modest result, this maybe isn't quite the exciting insight it appears to be.

And is the process really opaque? Once upon a time I coded a random cookie generator, which involved writing a lot of random cookies. After a couple of hundred it became disappointingly obvious that my 'random' creative thought processes were really very predictable, and mostly could be defined as pseudo-algorithms without much fuss or effort. The NLP people will tell you they've turned other kinds of formalised modelling into a psychological science.

So Blink is a bit glossy and shallow in comparison to the competition. And this seems par for the course for Gladwell, who seems to have made a career out of mystifying some fairly superficial observations - like The Tipping Point, which used to be called the point of no return until he turned his word processor on it.

His market seems to be management consultancy, where you can make a worryingly good living presenting this kind of thing at workshops.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 06:51:36 PM EST
since 'The Tipping Point' had an overall insight, but "His market seems to be management consultancy, where you can make a worryingly good living presenting this kind of thing at workshops." is spot on.

Scene at publisher's lunch in Soho:

"Mal, great stuff, loved the Hush Puppies bit. What's your thinking today? You've got a hunch? Cool. I love hunches - you gotta go with them, right? Oh? It's a book about hunches? Wait, wait, I've got the title already - Hunch Puppies. Ok, it was just a sketch. Off the cuff. Mal, Mal - lateral thinking, go with me now - another double espresso?....

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Jul 3rd, 2006 at 07:03:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I might have been less happy with the book if it had taken up more of my time ... from my point of view it went away in about an hour and a half.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 02:18:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So what made you want to review it?

I've read a lot of books and never really analysed how my likes and dislikes work. Why is it you want to write book reviews, then?

(These are guaranteed serious, no-snark, no-aggro questions.)

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 02:55:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Because I'm not very good at it: I feel that with a bit of practice I should be able to do at least competent reviews which are good content and useful to readers. And the act of writing notes or reviews or whatever helps fix the content of the book in my mind.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 03:19:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I might have been less happy with the book if it had taken up more of my time ... from my point of view it went away in about an hour and a half.

If you're looking for a pithy and apt review, you have it right there.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 03:30:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You're awfully negative.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 03:33:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Maybe. I mainlined a lot of Robert Anton Wilson in my late teens. After that, when it comes to Stuff That Goes On Inside Your Head books, there aren't many writers in quite the same league, which makes it harder to be positive.

I'm fascinated, in a rather horrified way, by the management consultancy publishing market works, and how  low density content can become so popular and respected. People like Lakoff, Bourdieu and Debord have an insightful originality that's worth getting excited about. But Gladwell and the rest of the business-ish press are much better known, even though they're quite a bit less interesting and thoughtful.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 09:31:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I really like the idea of book reviews on EuroTrib.  I should keep my eyes out for more of these.

experts can train themselves to improve the quality of their intuitions

Can you give a brief example or description of this?

Point n'est besoin d'espérer pour entreprendre, ni de réussir pour persévérer. - Charles le Téméraire

by marco on Tue Jul 4th, 2006 at 02:09:38 AM EST
I found Blink to be an enjoyable read. I was quite taken with how much the book focused on race - naturally as racial intolerance was the reason Malcom Gladwell started the book.

Money is a sign of Poverty - Culture Saying
by RogueTrooper on Wed Jul 5th, 2006 at 06:11:51 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]