Rowan's Future of Choice

Fish speak Klingon, and other consequents

 A newsletter story from the Corporate Strategy Board on "consequent markets" got me thinking about the impact of possibilities on decisions (see last post).

If we perceive outcomes as not possible--such as surviving cancer or traveling back in time--we dismiss them, naturally, from our decision processes. As new outcomes become possible due to science, technology, or social changes, we should reconsider our trusted assumptions. Many of us have neither the time nor inclination to do so.

I believe CSB membership may be required to see the whole story. Let me know.

According to Wiki, "A consequent is the second half of a hypothetical proposition. In the standard form of such a proposition, it is the part that follows 'then'."

Imagine the possibilities

"If I were to wish for anything
I should not wish for wealth and power,
but for the passionate sense of what can be,
for the eye, which, ever young and ardent,
sees the possible.

Pleasure disappoints, possibility never.
And what wine is so sparkling,
what so fragrant,
what so intoxicating as possibility?"

[Søren Aaby Kierkegaard]

Pausing to think in a fast world

"A bat and a ball together cost $1.10. The bat costs $1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?

Did you say 10 cents?

More than half of a Princeton University economics class gave the same answer (as did most of my friends), and it is wrong.

The thought process that produced this wrong answer is an example of what Prof Kahneman calls 'System 1 thinking'. It is, he says, 'fast, effortless, associative.' We just impulsively pluck out the most intuitively obvious-sounding answer. We don't stop to deliberate, especially when the question seems trivial."

Click here for the correct answer and the full article in the Business Times.