The Great Mental Models Volume 1: General Thinking Concepts

It’s easier to fool ourselves that we’re right at a high level than at the micro level, because at the micro level we see and feel the immediate consequences. When we touch that hot stove, the feedback is powerful and instantaneous. At a high or macro level we are removed from the immediacy of the situation, and our ego steps in to create a narrative that suits what we want to believe, instead of what really happened.

Location 192

What happens when you take the Lifer/Stranger idea seriously and try to delineate carefully the domains in which you’re one or the other? There is no definite checklist for figuring this out, but if you don’t have at least a few years and a few failures under your belt, you cannot consider yourself competent in a circle.

Location 581

circle of competence? Within our circles of competence, we know exactly what we don’t know.

Location 606

A circle of competence cannot be built quickly. We don’t become Lifers overnight.

Location 612

«Learn from the mistakes of others. You can’t live long enough to make them all yourself.»

Location 625

Second, you need to monitor your track record in areas which you have, or want to have, a circle of competence.

Location 626

Keeping a journal of your own performance is the easiest and most private way to give self-feedback.

Location 635

What went wrong? How could I do better?

Location 636

If you ask a person to answer the question for you, they’ll be giving you a fish. If you ask them detailed and thoughtful questions, you’ll learn how to fish.

Location 659

«Ignorance more often begets confidence than knowledge.» Charles Darwin11

Location 703

Clarifying your thinking and explaining the origins of your ideas. (Why do I think this? What exactly do I think?) Challenging assumptions. (How do I know this is true? What if I thought the opposite?) Looking for evidence. (How can I back this up? What are the sources?) Considering alternative perspectives. (What might others think? How do I know I am correct?) Examining consequences and implications. (What if I am wrong? What are the consequences if I am?) Questioning the original questions. (Why did I think that? Was I correct? What conclusions can I draw from the reasoning process?)

Location 796

«Stupidity is the same as evil if you judge by the results.» Margaret Atwood

Location 1077

Second-order thinking involves asking ourselves if what we are doing now is going to get us the results we want.

Location 1116

When making choices, considering consequences can help us avoid future problems. We must ask ourselves the critical question: And then what?

Location 1183

There are three important aspects of probability that we need to explain so you can integrate them into your thinking to get into the ballpark and improve your chances of catching the ball: Bayesian thinking Fat-tailed curves Asymmetries

Location 1214

In a fat-tailed curve there is no real cap on extreme events. The more extreme events that are possible, the longer the tails of the curve get. Any one extreme event is still unlikely, but the sheer number of options means that we can’t rely on the most common outcomes as representing the average. The more extreme events that are possible, the higher the probability that one of them will occur. Crazy things are definitely going to happen, and we have no way of identifying when.

Location 1256

Always be extra mindful of the tails: They might mean everything.

Location 1268

The important thing is not to sit down and imagine every possible scenario in the tail (by definition, it is impossible) but to deal with fat-tailed domains in the correct way: by positioning ourselves to survive or even benefit from the wildly unpredictable future, by being the only ones thinking correctly and planning for a world we don’t fully understand.

Location 1272

How often do you leave “on time” and arrive 20% early? Almost never? How often do you leave “on time” and arrive 20% late? All the time? Exactly. Your estimation errors are asymmetric, skewing in a single direction. This is often the case with probabilistic decision-making.

Location 1316

There are two approaches to applying inversion in your life. Start by assuming that what you’re trying to prove is either true or false, then show what else would have to be true. Instead of aiming directly for your goal, think deeply about what you want to avoid and then see what options are left over.

Location 1435

Instead of wasting your time trying to disprove complex scenarios, you can make decisions more confidently by basing them on the explanation that has the fewest moving parts.

Location 1581

Sometimes unnecessary complexity just papers over the systemic flaws that will eventually choke us. Opting for the simple helps us make decisions based on how things really are.

Location 1648

Hard to trace in its origin, Hanlon’s Razor states that we should not attribute to malice that which is more easily explained by stupidity.

Location 1712

When we see something we don’t like happen and which seems wrong, we assume it’s intentional. But it’s more likely that it’s completely unintentional. Assuming someone is doing wrong and doing it purposefully is like assuming Linda is more likely to be a bank teller and a feminist. Most people doing wrong are not bad people trying to be malicious.

Location 1739

The man who saved the world On October 27, 1962, Vasili Arkhipov stayed calm, didn’t assume malice, and saved the world. Seriously. This was the height of the Cuban missile crisis. Tensions were high between the United States and the Soviet Union. The world felt on the verge of nuclear war, a catastrophic outcome for all. American destroyers and Soviet subs were in a standoff in the waters off Cuba. Although they were technically in International waters, the Americans had informed the Soviets that they would be dropping blank depth charges to force the Soviet submarines to surface. The problem was, Soviet HQ had failed to pass this information along, so the subs in the area were ignorant of the planned American action.6 Arkhipov was an officer aboard Soviet sub B-59—a sub that, unbeknownst to the Americans, was carrying a nuclear weapon. When the depth charges began to detonate above them, the Soviets on board B-59 assumed the worst. Convinced that war had broken out, the captain of the sub wanted to arm and deploy the nuclear-tipped torpedo. This would have been an unprecedented disaster. It would have significantly changed the world as we know it, with both the geopolitical and nuclear fallout affecting us for decades. Luckily for us, the launch of the torpedo required all three senior officers on board to agree, and Arkhipov didn’t. Instead of assuming malice, he stayed calm and insisted on surfacing to contact Moscow. Although the explosions around the submarine could have been malicious, Arkhipov realized that to assume so would put the lives of billions in peril. Far better to suppose mistakes and ignorance, and base the decision not to launch on that. In doing so, he saved the world. They surfaced and returned to Moscow. Arkhipov wasn’t hailed as a hero until the record was declassified 40 years later, when documents revealed just how close the world had come to nuclear war.

Location 1766