[grupthink]

System 1 and 2 is a myth. There is only memory and computation. For a complex problem, retrieving from memory is fast, and performing computation is slow. Furthermore, when performing computation, there are different heuristics that you can use to think about a problem, e.g. If you want to predict the orbit of a satellite, you can use Kepler's laws which gives you the full sweeping elliptical motion. Alternatively, you can use Newtons laws for which you need to calculate each time step. Alternatively, you can calculate all the quantum interactions between the satellite, earth, and sun (are we going to call this System 3 because it is more rigorous and is "closer to metal"?).

[mewpmewp2]

I don't get how you can conclude it is a myth. These are observations on how people think. What is the myth part. I can clearly observe myself doing fast intuitive decisions which I might even not know the logical reasoning behind, but also I can solve problems by thinking through them using my internal monologue. Are these myths?

[nighthawk454]

The error lies in thinking they're 'real' systems to be taken for granted and blindly reasoned forward from, instead of sometimes-helpful academic categorizations.

You can always factor things into groups. e.g. 'Thoughts about now vs thoughts about the future'. Extending that to say there are therefore two modes of thinking and that the brain must handle your two groups differently, at some fundamental or physiological level, and there are only these two modes and all things are either one or the other ... is perhaps quite misguided without more support.

"It's only a model"

[andrewchambers]

Ok, if we can define system 1 as retrieval and system 2 as computation and then we all agree.