Thinking Fast and Slow - Study Notes - Version 2: 03

Chapter 3: The Lazy Controller

S2 has a natural speed — while monitoring envir’t, random thoughts, minor decisions
self-control is req’d for coherent or effortful thinking, fighting inherent laziness (“law of least effort”)
sometimes cognitive thinking achieves flow = “state of effortless concentr’n so deep that we lose sense of time, of self, of personal problems” — in a state of flow, no sf-control req’d to maintain focused attention on intense activities, resource of sf-control are freed to be directed to task at hand

sf-control (S2) takes mental effort, so when cognitive effort (S2) is high, sf-control is reduced — e.g. when cogn’ly busy, more prone to give in to tempt’n, to S1 choices, selfish choices, sexist lang., superf’l social judg’ts
S2 controls thought & behaviour
∃a shared pool of mental energy, all voluntary effort (cognitive, emotional, physical) draws at least partly on it — any effort of will or self-control is tiring, reduces sf-control —lost motivation, after sf-control in one task, not feel like making an effort in another —called ego depletion — not just a metaphor, consumption of glucose; can restore sf-control by taking glucose — e.g. Israeli judges grant parole more often soon after food breaks
e.g. activities that deplete self-control — try not think of white bears, stop emotional response to a stirring film, make series of choices involving conflict, try impress others, respond kindly to partner’s bad behavior, interact w. a person of a different race (for prejudiced indiv’ls)
e.g. indications of depletion —deviate fr. one’s diet, overspend on impulsive purchases, react aggress’ly to provoc’n, persist less time in handgrip, perform poorly in cogn. tasks & logical decision making

S2 monitors & controls suggestions of S1 — e.g. puzzle: A bat & ball cost $1.10. The bat costs one dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost? — intuition (S1) suggests easy, incorrect answer, 10 cents — failure to check answ. w. simple math task, failure to think of social cue, Why asked such an “obvious” question?
e.g. syllogism: All roses are flowers. Some flowers fade quickly. Therefore some roses fade quickly. — seems intuit’ly valid, but it’s invalid, checking the logic req. S2 — concl’n: if believe a conclusion is true àbelieve argu’ts that seem to support it, even invalid ones — for S1, concl’n comes first, argu’ts follow
e. g. the Michigan/Detroit problem — How many murders occur in the state of Michigan in one year? — answ. depends on memory that Detroit (high crime) is in Michigan, retrieved more quickly in some people, but can be found w. an S2 search of memory
these 3 examples show S2 is lazy, accepts easy S1 responses — people less prone to these errors are more intellect’ly engaged, “rational”

· “She did not have to struggle to stay on task for hours. She was in a state of flow.”

· “His ego was depleted after a long day of meetings. So he just turned to standard operating procedures instead of thinking through the problem.”

· “He didn’t bother to check whether what he said made sense. Does he usually have a lazy System 2 or was he unusually tired?”

· “Unfortunately, she tends to say the first thing that comes into her mind. She probably also has trouble delaying gratification. Weak System 2.”