Thinking, Fast and Slow
by Daniel Kahneman
✓

or to save your progress

Themes and Colors
Intuition, Deliberation, and Laziness Theme Icon
Human Fallibility and Overconfidence Theme Icon
Stories and Subjectivity vs. Statistics and Objectivity Theme Icon
Choices, Losses, and Gains Theme Icon
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in Thinking, Fast and Slow, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Human Fallibility and Overconfidence Theme Icon
Human Fallibility and Overconfidence Theme Icon

After introducing the two modes of thinking he calls “System 1” and “System 2,” Kahneman illuminates some of the underlying fallacies people rely on as they process information. In addition to humans’ natural tendency towards laziness, people also tend to be overconfident in their abilities to correctly answer questions and make calculations. This overconfidence leads not only to biased conclusions based on a person’s subjective experiences, but often leads to outright error.

In order to make their lives easier, people tend to streamline their thoughts and feelings when answering questions, often ignoring relevant outside data. This makes them extremely confident in their answers, but only because they have simplified their mental processes. Kahneman describes how people tend to commit “confirmation bias”: believing themselves to be generally right, people look for evidence that confirms a belief they already hold rather than looking for evidence that disproves it. For example, if people are asked, “Is Sam friendly?” they look for evidence to confirm that Sam is, in fact, friendly, rather than finding examples that disprove it. Therefore, they are biased to agree with the question.

Similarly, the “halo effect” is another facet of confirmation bias, in which people’s positive predispositions toward people, places, or things make them want to like everything about that person, place, or thing; the same is true of things people harbor negative feelings about. Kahneman uses a principle, “What you see is all there is” (WYSIATI) to explain how people only use information presented to them in their consideration of facts and calculations. This also makes them overconfident in their predictive abilities. For example, when Kahneman worked in the Israeli Army, he evaluated soldiers for officer training by watching a team-building exercise for a few hours. He would then make predictions about who might be the best candidate for the training. Ultimately, his predictions were only slightly better than blind guesses. He only used what he was able to see, assumed that a few hours would be representative of soldiers’ performances more generally, and had great confidence in his ability to predict. People also place too much confidence in what they know from their own experiences and ignore potential outside data, because they inherently feel more secure in their own knowledge and experiences than those of others.

People tend to overestimate statistics when they can readily relate to them—for example, people will give a higher estimate for the rate of car crashes if they have personally been in one or witnessed one recently. Kahneman gives another example in which two partners each estimate that they do 70 percent of the housework, because they usually only remember the instances in which they do the chores. This also happens with news stories: people fear terrorism because it dominates the news cycles, yet fatal car crashes are far more common. As Kahneman writes, “Emotion and vividness influence fluency, availability and judgments of probability—and thus account for our excessive response to the few rare events that we do not ignore.” The more readily people can think of examples, the more they overestimate frequency and probability.

In addition to being overconfident about their own knowledge and experiences, people are overconfident about their own personal attributes and abilities. Kahneman writes how CFOs (chief financial officers) are shown to be grossly overconfident about their abilities to predict the market. Likewise, medical experts who were asked about their diagnoses and were “completely certain” about them were actually wrong 40 percent of the time. The issue is that overconfident people are rewarded, as they are more easily able to gain the trust of clients. People also become more confident in hindsight. People think they understand the past, which implies that they should understand the future. In reality, however, they understand the past less than they think they do. A survey was conducted in 1972, just before President Nixon travelled to China to meet with Mao Zedong. Respondents assigned probabilities to fifteen different possible outcomes of the meeting. After Nixon’s return, respondents were asked to recall the probability they assigned to different outcomes. If the event had actually occurred, they exaggerated what they had thought the probability was. This hindsight bias leads people to evaluate decision-making processes in a faulty way—by the outcome, not by whether the decision was sound at the time. Kahneman explains, “We are prone to blame decision makers for good decisions that worked out badly and to give them too little credit for successful moves that appear obvious only after the fact.”

People also assume that statistical rules do not apply to them; they assume the best-case scenario for themselves and rarely consider the worst-case scenario. Kahneman experiences this himself when he tries to draft a textbook for the Israeli Ministry of Education. The team he assembles works quickly together, and he asks them to estimate how long it might take to complete their job. The team members’ average answer is around two years. When he asks his colleague, Seymour, to estimate based on his knowledge of other teams, Seymour realizes that only about 40 percent of teams finish the job, and it usually takes seven or eight years. Kahneman realizes in hindsight that they should have abandoned their project, but they assumed that they might be the exception—even though they were not.

It makes sense that people rely on their own experiences to determine answers to questions—after all, their personal experiences are the only ones they have access to. However, this method is ultimately problematic because people rely too heavily on that experiential knowledge without understanding fully how their experiences fit into bigger patterns.  People often fail to account for the fact that they simplify their thought processes and exaggerate their responses. If Kahneman’s primary goal is to allow people to recognize how they make mistakes, revealing the situations in which people are typically overconfident is the first step in raising that awareness.

Related Themes from Other Texts
Compare and contrast themes from other texts to this theme…
Get the entire Thinking, Fast and Slow LitChart as a printable PDF.
"My students can't get enough of your charts and their results have gone through the roof." -Graham S.
Thinking, Fast and Slow PDF

Human Fallibility and Overconfidence Quotes in Thinking, Fast and Slow

Below you will find the important quotes in Thinking, Fast and Slow related to the theme of Human Fallibility and Overconfidence.

Part 1, Chapter 1 Quotes

The gorilla study illustrates two important facts about our minds: we can be blind to the obvious, and we are also blind to our blindness.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 24
Explanation and Analysis:
One of the earliest experiments that Kahneman introduces involves participants watching a short film of two teams—one wearing white and one wearing black—passing basketballs. The viewers are so preoccupied with a task in which they must count the number of passes that they do not notice a woman wearing a gorilla suit walk through the game. The gorilla experiment, as Kahneman suggests, illustrates some of the mistakes that our brains fall victim to. This example in particular illustrates the limits of System 2—the system involved with deliberate effort and calculation. Counting the number of basketball passes is not something that Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus corrupti soluta. Qui aut a. Rerum voluptas debitis. Voluptatem accusantium est. Mollitia eaque ipsa. P

Part 1, Chapter 3 Quotes

The bat-and-ball problem is our first encounter with an observation that will be a recurrent theme of this book: many people are overconfident, prone to place too much faith in their intuitions.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 45
Explanation and Analysis:
In order to demonstrate our inherent laziness, Kahneman introduces a common puzzle that references a bat and a ball, in which the intuitive answer to the problem is an incorrect answer. With a simple check, he explains, one could easily identify that the intuitive answer as being wrong, but very few people actually do this check. This is a perfect demonstration of the principle that our System 2 processing is lazy. Instead of investing this slight amount of extra effort that it would take to verify the intuitive answer that System 1 has put forth, people choose simply rely on Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus corrupti sol

Part 1, Chapter 4 Quotes

The results are not made up, nor are they statistical flukes. You have no choice but to accept that the major conclusions of these studies are true. More important, you must accept that they are true about you.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 57
Explanation and Analysis:
In Chapter 4, Kahneman discusses the concept of priming, in which various external stimuli can subconsciously and imperceptibly change our behavior. These changes in behavior come as a result of System 1’s automatic associations and the network of patterns that it has developed over time. Thus, for example, if people are primed for money, they are shown to be less altruistic and more individualistic. Even though many people don’t believe that these subconscious effects are true of them, this exposes people to another kind of bias. Kahneman makes the point that it is important for people not to be overconfident Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Po

Part 1, Chapter 7 Quotes

Contrary to the rules of philosophers of science, who advise testing hypotheses by trying to refute them, people (and scientists, quite often) seek data that are likely to be compatible with the beliefs they currently hold.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 81
Explanation and Analysis:
Kahneman discusses how people form conclusions: when they are asked a question like “Is Sam friendly?” they will call up a different set of data than if they are asked “Is Sam unfriendly?” The difference between these two sets of data that people will seek demonstrates that people have a “confirmation bias”: they tend to look for examples that will confirm the beliefs they already hold, rather than try to test hypotheses that will prove them wrong. The presence of confirmation bias illustrates two of the book’s themes. First, it demonstrates that our cognitive processes are biased towards laziness—it is Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus corrupti soluta. Qui aut a. Rerum

We often fail to allow for the possibility that evidence that should be critical to our judgment is missing—what we see is all there is.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 87
Explanation and Analysis:
In a chapter devoted to demonstrating how our minds automatically jump to conclusions, Kahneman refers to a study in which people who only heard one side of a court case believed that side of the court case and were far more confident in their judgment than those who had heard both sides. This is due to a phenomenon that Kahneman calls “What you see is all there is” (WYSIATI). This means that the evidence that is in front of us is the sole evidence that we use to make judgments, without considering the possibility that we might need outside information. Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor as

Part 2, Chapter 12 Quotes

The explanation is a simple availability bias: both spouses remember their own individual efforts and contributions much more clearly than those of the other, and the difference in availability leads to a difference in judged frequency.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 131
Explanation and Analysis:
Kahneman explores the availability bias here, which reasons that when people try to estimate the frequency of a given category or event, they will rely much more on events that attract attention, that gain lots of media coverage, or that are personal and vivid in order to come up with their estimates (as opposed to trying to formulate some kind of statistical calculation or even relying on information that they know). This example, of two spouses who are asked to estimate the percentage of housework they do, falls into that third category. They both estimate that they do over half Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Co

Part 2, Chapter 13 Quotes

The lesson is clear: estimates of causes of death are warped by media coverage. The coverage is itself biased toward novelty and poignancy.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker), Paul Slovic
Page Number and Citation: 138
Explanation and Analysis:
Kahneman speaks about the availability bias—which reasons that we estimate frequency of an event based on our ability to come up with examples of that thing—in terms of risk and judgment. A team led by Paul Slovic asked people to estimate various causes of death, and often people would overestimate causes of death that were, as Kahneman explains here, covered more often by the media—which itself bases its coverage on different, interesting, and poignant events. Thus, we are readily influenced by the media because we are overconfident in the things that we have personally seen or heard about (this also Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis.

Part 3, Chapter 19 Quotes

A general limitation of the human mind is its imperfect ability to reconstruct past states of knowledge, or beliefs that have changed. Once you adopt a new view of the world (or of any part of it), you immediately lose much of your ability to recall what you used to believe before your mind changed.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 202
Explanation and Analysis:
This quote comes during Kahneman’s discussion of hindsight bias, in which he explains that we have a tendency to overestimate how much we knew about the past (an experiment shows that people will exaggerate the probability they assigned to an event happening if that event did in fact end up happening). This bias is part of a larger tendency that humans have towards overconfidence—we generally have greater faith in our own abilities than is truly warranted. Because we believe we understand the past, we also overestimate our ability to predict the future. These different factors, while they help us to Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus c

Part 3, Chapter 20 Quotes

The illusion of skill is not only an individual aberration; it is deeply ingrained in the culture of the industry. Facts that challenge such basic assumptions—and thereby threaten people’s livelihood and self-esteem—are simply not absorbed.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Related Symbols: Müller-Lyer Illusion
Page Number and Citation: 216
Explanation and Analysis:
Part 3 is largely concerned with the theme of overconfidence, and Kahneman spends a good deal of time focusing on “experts” and people who have more confidence in their predictive abilities or skill than is statistically warranted. This chapter particularly focuses on professionals in the financial industry. Kahneman mathematically proves that financial investors’ success on a year-by-year basis is largely due to luck, and that an average person could do as well as they do. Of course, this contradicts the financial investors’ own experience of what they do—asserting that it requires a good deal of skill to find success in Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus c

Part 3, Chapter 21 Quotes

Applying Apgar’s score, the staff in delivery rooms finally had consistent standards for determining which babies were in trouble, and the formula is credited for an important contribution to reducing infant mortality.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 227
Explanation and Analysis:
Kahneman describes the Apgar test as a prime example of why standardized scoring is more reliable than human intuition. Prior to the development of the Apgar test, obstetricians used different metrics to determine whether a newborn infant might be in distress and at risk for brain damage or death. In 1953, Virginia Apgar developed a set of five variables that people could score on a scale from one to three. The aggregate score served as a good indicator of whether a baby was healthy or not. This served as a very important development in delivery rooms. Instead of relying on Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Com

Part 3, Chapter 23 Quotes

In this view, people often (but not always) take on risky projects because they are overly optimistic about the odds they face. I will return to this idea several times in this book—it probably contributes to an explanation of why people litigate, why they start wars, and why they open small businesses.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 253
Explanation and Analysis:
Kahneman describes an instance in which he himself fell victim to overconfidence. When creating a textbook, he and his team vastly underestimated the time and effort it would take to complete it. This is what he calls the planning fallacy, in which people assume the best-case scenario for themselves because they are confident in their own abilities to complete a task or project, despite a baseline assessment of how long something might take or how difficult it might be. This overconfidence leads to costly mistakes—while the group had estimated 1.5-2.5 years to complete the project, the curriculum had in fact Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt.

Part 3, Chapter 24 Quotes

Experts who acknowledge the full extent of their ignorance may expect to be replaced by more confident competitors, who are better able to gain the trust of clients.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 263
Explanation and Analysis:
As Kahneman continues to explore what it means to be an “expert” and the overconfidence that they often exhibit, he considers a variety of fields in which confidence is rewarded. Even though overconfidence often comes with an increase in mistakes and biases, people prefer overconfident individuals in fields like financial investment, in television hosting, and in medicine. He cites statistics for each of these areas that demonstrate why being overconfident can actually be harmful, because people are too willing to rely on their own (flawed) intuitions. Kahneman also devotes a large portion of the book to demonstrating the sheer variety Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus corrupti solu

Part 4, Chapter 30 Quotes

You read that “a vaccine that protects children from a fatal disease carries a 0.001% risk of permanent disability.” The risk appears small. Now consider another description of the same risk: “One of 100,000 vaccinated children will be permanently disabled.” The second statement does something to your mind that the first does not.

Related Characters: Daniel Kahneman (speaker)
Page Number and Citation: 329
Explanation and Analysis:
Kahneman displays the difficulty that many people have with statistics, and particularly with a concept he calls “denominator neglect.” This bias ignores the base-rate in frequency and instead focuses on individuals, as in this example. When the statistic is communicated not in terms of percentages but instead in terms of concrete amounts, the 99,999 children who are unaffected by the vaccine become relatively unimportant: instead, people focus on the single child that is affected. The second example arouses our emotions much more than the first, because we find stories (and the images that our minds conjure) to be much more Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus corrupti soluta. Qui aut a. Rerum voluptas debitis. Voluptatem accusantium est. Mollitia eaque ipsa. Perferendis consectetur et. Dicta imped