Smart Thinking für das dritte Jahrtausend: Kritisch denken, mit Unsicherheit umgehen, besser entscheiden

by Saul Perlmutter, John Campbell, Robert Maccoun

Die heutige Informationsflut macht es uns schwerer und schwerer, wirklich Wichtiges von Unwichtigem zu unterscheiden, Fakten zu erkennen und Bullshit zu entlarven. Ein Physiker, ein Psychologe und ein Philosoph zeigen in diesem Buch, das auf einem extrem erfolgreichen Kurs der Universität Berkeley basiert, welche Werkzeuge und Methoden Wissenschaftler heute anwenden, um sich und andere vor Irrtümern zu schützen, die Welt zu verstehen und begründete Entscheidungen zu treffen. Wir alle können von diesen bewährten Techniken lernen, um die kleinen und großen Probleme unseres Lebens zu lösen!

Genres: Nonfiction, Science, Psychology, Philosophy, Self Help, Technology, Finance

382 pages, Kindle Edition

Published October 24, 2024

Reviews

[Natalie Park · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars. Basically how to think critically and analyze disparate pieces of information. It didn’t feel like there was many new ideas but probably it was good to put this out into the world with so much disinformation and illogical conclusions.

[Chris Boutté · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is on an insanely important topic, which is becoming a better thinker. The authors include a physicist, a psychologist, and a philosopher, so I was pretty excited to check this book out. Now, as I give my review of this book, just know that it’s insanely bias because I read a ton of books on this topic, so my experience is much different compared to someone who hasn’t read many of these or hasn’t read any at all.

Overall, this book was fine. I was expecting a lot more from this book, but it wasn’t really there. Sure, there were some studies that were interesting and some of the personal stories with lessons the authors have learned to improve their own thinking were great, but there wasn’t much that was groundbreaking in this book. Again, it’s important to remember that I’ve read dozens of these books.

If you’re just now becoming interested in the topic of becoming a better thinker, this is a 10 out of 10 book to learn about biases, heuristics, and other thinking errors. The authors teach a course at UC Berkeley, so they know their stuff. I definitely recommend this book to anyone new to the topic or haven’t read many books in this realm.

[Dustin Barlow · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is very important for modern world. This gave great tools and information to aid in critical thinking and analysis in a world full of misinformation and disinformation. Highly recommend.

[CatReader · Rating 3 out of 5]

Third Millenium Thinking (abbreviated 3MT), the authors (three academics from different disciplines) posit that in our current era, we need to do a better job of thinking critically, evaluating and weighing evidence, and carefully considering future and distant future impacts of current behavior, more so than in previous generations where technology was less advanced and the world was less globalized. This is an interesting take, though I would posit that the tenets and need for 3MT isn't necessarily unique to our current era.

Further reading -- books that make similar points:
Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway
Rigor Mortis: How Sloppy Science Creates Worthless Cures, Crushes Hope, and Wastes Billions by Richard Harris
Elastic: Flexible Thinking in a Time of Change by Leonard Mlodinow

[Jon · Rating 3 out of 5]

I spent most of the second half of this book wondering how it would have been different if the authors had taken their own advice about probabilistic thinking and the importance of incorporating counterfactuals. Had they, for example, given serious account of relevant scholarship in rhetoric, education, political theory, etc., they might have been better positioned to at least offer some thoughtful, grounded insights on the current and future political landscape with all its challenges and opportunities. As it is, the book started off with some interesting discussions about the practical advantages of scientific thinking, but by the end it became a rather tired reiteration the claim that society could be amazing if only everyone else could reason like us. The result is a pretty utopic vision of "science" (e.g., no discussion of the challenges posed to scientific thinking within professional communities by the scramble for research funding, publishing expectations, etc.) and a narrow vision of the political.

Probably worth a read for the early chapters, but don't expect any groundbreaking insights for creating collective consensus.

[Florent Diverchy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A handy guide on how to apply scientific thinking in your day to day reflections, in order to reduce bias, deal with disinformation and make better predictions.
Best take away for me: thinking in terms of probability instead of binary and always thinks about why you can be right, but also how you can be wrong.

[Nimish · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not bad in and of itself, but I’d argue this isn’t in any way “new” thinking, but rather explicitly laying out our civilization’s ideal on how people should be (and should have been) thinking for the last few hundred years.

I don’t know if it has been laid out as explicitly anywhere, and there is a certain value to that, and the authors have done so in a very positive and kind way.

But I’d argue that “third millennium thinking” really would be in understanding why these forms of thinking haven’t caught on despite being promoted as extensively as they have. There’s a note around certainty and politicians — how if one day everyone thinks like this, then we as a civilization will be OK with politicians saying “I think there’s a 65% chance this will work” vs demanding unwavering certainty.

There are a lot of ideals this style of thinking had predicted for the last few hundred years that haven’t come to fruition. When confronted with this, the answer to why has always been “ignorance” with the prediction that more people exposed to this worldview would cause adoption and improvements of society. Again, while almost no scientific advance would be possible without scientific thinking like this, it seems clear that there’s a huge brick wall when it comes to social advancements, and simply telling more people about scientific thinking won’t cut it.

I think real “third millennium thinking” has to address that gap.

[Allira]

Adam Grant rec

[Charles Reed · Rating 4 out of 5]

85%

A book focused on training people to act and think logically and with reasoning especially in our extremely powerfully resourced environment? Yes please. A bit lacking in practical application in day-to-day life but there are some great intentions here and this book was executed greatly.

[Antonio Gallo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Più nonsenso che senso, basandomi su quello che letto nel libro "Trovare il senso in un mondo senza senso. Pensare nel terzo millennio" di Saul Perlmutter, John Campbell e Robert MacCoun. Si propone un approccio pragmatico e metodologico alla questione del senso piuttosto che una risposta definitiva.

Gli autori - che includono un premio Nobel per la fisica (Perlmutter), un filosofo (Campbell) e un esperto di politiche pubbliche (MacCoun) - sembrano aver trovato un "senso" specifico nel processo stesso del pensiero critico e scientifico. Il libro "mostra come analizzare in modo critico la realtà, prendere decisioni valide e risolvere i problemi - individualmente e collettivamente - utilizzando i trucchi del mestiere degli scienziati".

La loro risposta alla domanda sul senso non è filosofica o esistenziale in senso tradizionale, ma metodologica: il senso si trova nell'adozione di strumenti intellettuali rigorosi per navigare la complessità del mondo contemporaneo. L'opera "ci offre un approccio per dare un senso al nonsenso, insegnandoci a prendere decisioni valide e a risolvere problemi".

In sostanza, gli autori sembrano aver "trovato" il senso nel processo di pensiero stesso - non come una verità assoluta da scoprire, ma come una competenza da sviluppare. Il loro approccio suggerisce che il senso emerge dall'applicazione di metodi scientifici e razionali alla comprensione della realtà, piuttosto che dalla ricerca di significati ultimi o trascendenti. Se voi avete capito, il senso è vostro. Io preferisco il nonsenso.

[Richard Thompson · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's a primer about methods of clear thinking. It talks about when you should be careful about your own certainty, how you can think probabilistically, being aware of your cognitive biases and so forth. It was nothing new for me. I like to think that I mostly practice these techniques already automatically as I go through the world, though I am sure that I do so less consistently in practice than I think that I do. So in that regard, the book was useful reinforcement.

The thing that I liked best about the book was a point that only comes in at the end, but that is perhaps more effective by being presented that way as a closing thought - clear thinking always has to include a consideration of community. If your thinking is purely abstract, driven only by principles of logic and reason and probability, existing only in Plato's world of perfect forms, then you will miss the most important thing. Cold calculation is miscalculation. It's the lesson of Mr. Spock from Star Trek, who is presented to us as the embodiment of pure logic, but as we get to know him, we come to understand that his logic is always ultimately tempered by his friendship for Captain Kirk and his deep caring about the crew of the Enterprise and their mission.

[Brooke · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good book, and super timely, as well as incredibly important given all the misinformation, disinformation, and the way all of us are inundated every day with information, content, and stimulation, most of which is largely just noise and nonsense.

This book is especially important because of the echo chambers in which most of us now find ourselves, chambers of people that only confirm and amplify what we already believe to be true, much of which is still likely inaccurate and/or missing a lot of key facts, and so we walk around in very narrow containers of incredibly limited knowledge, much of which is still faulty and littered with holes. And this applies to thinking and values on both sides of the political spectrum.

This book helps with learning to think critically, examine thoughtfully, and work through this stuff so we don't descend further into a society of extremism, black-and-white thinking, and stupidity. Thus, I highly recommend this book. It's not an easy read per say, though it's also not difficult. It is one worth sticking with and preserving through, though, since it's incredibly important.

[Rick Presley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Since I've been around the block for more than a few minutes and since I come from a science background, almost none of this was new to me. However, the authors framed this well I would highly recommend it to those in their 20's or 30's, especially if they want to argue online. It doesn't cover all the logical fallacies or errors in reasoning, but it does go over the essentials and offers habits that will prevent most errors of thinking. The humble attitude throughout is what makes this book stellar. This is not a bunch of know-it-alls warning you about why you're wrong, (or even why everyone else is wrong and you might be right) but is a cautionary warning that even when we have the best of intentions, it doesn't mean we're going to get it right. And we need to be OK with that. And correcting ourselves when we are shown to be wrong, painful though it may be.

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

This started off as more-or-less a guide to how scientists think, and most of the content was quite familiar, although it is always helpful to have concepts made explicit. I found the greatest value in the later sections dealing with new approaches to working with crowds, acknowledging participants are not all on the same side. The book benefited by being written by a physicist, a philosopher and a social scientist, making the insights broadly applicable and sorely needed in this conflict-riddled world. Scientific optimism was also highlighted as a valuable trait, and manifests here with the authors' parting messages that emerging technologies and 3MT approaches are capable of making a difference.

[Jānis Cimbulis · Rating 5 out of 5]

The authors did a fairly accurate review of the book in it's final chapter:

".. we don’t claim it is completely original to us, and we certainly don’t claim it can stand alone as an authoritative work of intellectual history. Everything in the first two columns has been discussed and dissected by many different scholars in many different disciplines.
But we do think the third column describes emerging patterns that have not been fully or widely appreciated yet."

If you replace "column" with "part", the quote perfectly mirrors my opinions while reading the book. The last part is what makes it a worthwhile read.

[Natalia Kasmeridi · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book presents an optimistic vision of societal progress, emphasizing trust and social optimism as key to shaping the future. However, the book assumes these qualities exist in abundance, often overlooking skepticism and division. It also falls into confirmation bias, reinforcing its hopeful perspective without fully addressing counterarguments or historical failures. A more nuanced take on things going wrong and societal divides would have strengthened its arguments.

Regardless, the book gets 5 stars because it's amazing to see 3 different people all with different academic backgrounds come together and explain how people think/should think these days.

[Lorenzo Scarafia · Rating 4 out of 5]

In an age where information is of so easy access through the new technological innovations there needs to be a process of critically evaluating the information, this is a book that gives you the tools to do so, not only for evaluating information but to develop and articulate our own individual thoughts and to open up real useful discussions with your community on anything that you might have ever pondered on. Confidence, estimation, facing the different values and opinions people from different backgrounds from ours might have, and aiming for a new enlightenment through the techniques and tools proposed in this book this is the 3MT.

[Cindy · Rating 4 out of 5]

How can we possibly know what's true when we're bombarded by studies and opinions and research and talking heads at every turn? This was a good start to acquiring the tools we need to sort and evaluate all that. I found myself thinking of people who need this book, but I don't know if they'd ever consider themselves as needing it. Then I thought maybe I'm one of the ones who needs it! It really wouldn't hurt anyone to honestly look at how they form, keep and defend their opinions.

[Steven Leonard · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good book, not a great book. The subjects discussed — decision-making, systems thinking, intuition — have been addressed better by other writers, such as Kahneman, Senge, and Klein. This book could also be exhaustively repetitious — the final third of the book essentially repeated earlier parts of the book with different, less interesting anecdotes.

[Mariana Tupper]

Hope is not just another 4-letter word. Three authors share their ideas for how humanity can indeed rise to our current challenges. Working together actually can provide some surprising benefits, even when we assume we disagree. (Especially when we disagree?) These and other ideas/facts/stories are presented for readers to consider. Stimulating conversations await us!

[Mike Shaw · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was OK. Hoping for more. The concept of the book sounded more fun than it was.

Good coverage on the scientific method and some of the errors we make, but not super helpful.

For more useful solutions in decision making, I would suggest Decisive by Chip & Dan Heath.

[Stephanie Oldfield · Rating 4 out of 5]

On audiobook, some of the tables/lists are quite disorienting and boring to listen to. It can be hard to follow.
But in general, many compelling points, ideas and strategies for navigating the masses of information we sift through each day.

[Arys Nogueron · Rating 3 out of 5]

For individuals who work for the sciences, this book will not be too stimulating. There are some chapters associated with how to approach conflict within groups and bias. I did enjoy the science and mathematics approach

[Shana Yates · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars

[Patrick Hanlon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Covers a lot of the territory that Nicholas Nassim Taleb and Daniel Kahnemann cover in their respective books and cites examples that are not quite as fresh.

[Ricardo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great for high schoolers who want to have some guidance. Slightly technical for that level though.

[Madonna]

Since you never bothered to send me this book that you said I won, It is a little hard for me to review it. I don't know if anyone else got their copy, but I did not. Lousy way to run a business.

[Roy Kenagy]

DMPL EXAMINED 2024_07_19 AUDIBLE WISH LIST

[Peter · Rating 3 out of 5]

The premise is exciting and I appreciated a lot of the lessons. But at times I felt that things were underdelivered. Certainly a 3 or higher, but at times it was repetitive in a needless fashion.

[Samantha Moore · Rating 2 out of 5]

Important topic. Boring delivery.