jennifyr's review against another edition
informative
lighthearted
medium-paced
4.0
I liked listening to this book. The author had good tips and interesting stories about how to change your mindset from an either/or right/wrong point of view, to one that lives in the probabilities. Here, we can be kinder to ourselves and others when decisions don't go exactly as we thought. We can also make better decisions by thinking through the possible outcomes.
rberenguel's review against another edition
3.0
The core premise is strong, but could essentially be summarised in a few pages. Not a _bad_ book, though
bookitdanno's review against another edition
4.0
This book has made an actual difference in the way I think. More and more, I think in probabilities. Rather than making absolute statements, I tend to couch my statements in terms of degrees of confidence, e.g., “I’m 75% sure that . . . .” Uncertainties are slippery and hard to manage, but actually estimating probabilities and degrees of confidence helps, and you can get better with practice . . . I think . . . 90% sure . . . . I would especially recommend it to anyone who trades stocks. My only real criticism is that it is a little too repetitive, but it’s a quick read.
tylercritchfield's review against another edition
4.0
Alternate Title: Thinking under Uncertainty
This was an excellent perspective. The basic premise is that we typically chalk up our decisions as "good" or "bad" based on the result, forgetting there are often factors out of our control that also affect outcomes. A great decision can turn out poorly, but it doesn't mean we should have done something else. The key is to make our thinking more non-deterministic and do what we can to learn from all our decisions.
The author points out that every decision we make is a bet on our future, whether we think of it that way or not. One way to make better decisions is to make those bets explicit, to identify probabilities of outcomes, uncertainty, etc. This makes us less likely to feel like a failure when things don't turn out and also avoid a false euphoria when they do happen to turn out.
This was an excellent perspective. The basic premise is that we typically chalk up our decisions as "good" or "bad" based on the result, forgetting there are often factors out of our control that also affect outcomes. A great decision can turn out poorly, but it doesn't mean we should have done something else. The key is to make our thinking more non-deterministic and do what we can to learn from all our decisions.
The author points out that every decision we make is a bet on our future, whether we think of it that way or not. One way to make better decisions is to make those bets explicit, to identify probabilities of outcomes, uncertainty, etc. This makes us less likely to feel like a failure when things don't turn out and also avoid a false euphoria when they do happen to turn out.
composed's review against another edition
4.0
Solidly interesting, and helped me with some personal issues around neurodivergent decision making difficulties.
Probably the most important part for me to re-hear was the research around how the brain takes in information. And the most important part I learned is that additionally, "smart" people are MORE likely to justify bad information that's made it into the brain, because we're so good at post hoc reasoning.
Probably the most important part for me to re-hear was the research around how the brain takes in information. And the most important part I learned is that additionally, "smart" people are MORE likely to justify bad information that's made it into the brain, because we're so good at post hoc reasoning.
rick2's review against another edition
2.0
This book is so frustrating. Nuggets of good stuff. But the majority of the time reading it I was thinking "Ok.... And?" The author will raise a point, then meander into meaningless territory that doesn't make her ideas any clearer. It felt like Annie had a few solid things to say, then realized she needed to write three times as much to fill the book. Should have been a blog post or a Ted talk.