top | item 42576044

(no title)

bluepizza | 1 year ago

My understanding was that System 1/System 2 thinking is unproven conjecture[1] that can't even be replicated[2]. It would be unwise to analyse behaviour using this framework.

1: https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/a-hovercraft-full-... 2: https://replicationindex.com/2016/01/31/a-revised-introducti...

discuss

order

nedrocks|1 year ago

I don't want to argue the basis of system 1/system 2 as described in [1], because the point I'm taking away is more about whether they interoperate at times of decision making. The point I'm making is system 2 is a far more costly (effortful in the article) mechanism of decision making.

The point I'm making is, as an organism we avoid utilizing higher-effort or higher-cost actions when unnecessary. An untrained lower-cost (IR1 in the article or System 1 in my definition) decision will result in not caring about quality. A trained lower-cost decision will utilize heuristics to bias for higher quality.

bluepizza|1 year ago

The point of the links I've shared is that there is no such thing as System 1/2, and decision effort/cost is not a factor.