Zitat des Tages von Daniel Kahneman:
We're blind to our blindness. We have very little idea of how little we know. We're not designed to know how little we know.
After a crisis we tell ourselves we understand why it happened and maintain the illusion that the world is understandable. In fact, we should accept the world is incomprehensible much of the time.
In essence, the optimistic style involves taking credit for successes but little blame for failures.
Banks are run by executives, and executives protect themselves, and that does not always mean that banks are going to behave rationally.
It doesn't take many observations to think you've spotted a trend, and it's probably not a trend at all.
Political columnists and sports pundits are rewarded for being overconfident.
I'm not a great believer in self-help.
Except for some effects that I attribute mostly to age, my intuitive thinking is just as prone to overconfidence, extreme predictions, and the planning fallacy as it was before I made a study of these issues.
Nothing in life is quite as important as you think it is while you're thinking about it.
By their very nature, heuristic shortcuts will produce biases, and that is true for both humans and artificial intelligence, but the heuristics of AI are not necessarily the human ones.
When people talk of the economy being strong, they don't seem to feel that they, too, are better off.
There's a tendency to look at investments in isolation. Investors focus on the risk of individual securities.
Doubting what you see is a very odd experience. And doubting what you remember is a little less odd than doubting what you see. But it's also a pretty odd experience, because some memories come with a very compelling sense of truth about them, and that happens to be the case even for memories that are not true.
The concept of happiness has to be reorganised.
There's a very good reason for why economics developed the way it did, and that is that in many situations, the assumption that people will exploit the opportunities available to them is very plausible, and it simplifies the analysis of how markets will behave.
Organizations may be better able to tame optimism than individuals are.
If you're going to be unreligious, it's likely going to be due to reflecting on it and finding some things that are hard to believe.
People should be conscious of the large contribution made by anything that gets people together easily in the reduction of loneliness and emotional well-being.
It's clear that policymakers and economists are going to be interested in the measurement of well-being primarily as it correlates with health; they also want to know whether researchers can validate subjective responses with physiological indices.
I would not advise people to buy a car or house without making a list. You will probably improve your intuitions by making a list and then sleeping on it.
It was always assumed I would be a professor. I grew up thinking it.
We don't see very far in the future, we are very focused on one idea at a time, one problem at a time, and all these are incompatible with rationality as economic theory assumes it.
The planning fallacy is that you make a plan, which is usually a best-case scenario. Then you assume that the outcome will follow your plan, even when you should know better.
We know that the French are very different from the Americans in their satisfaction with life. They're much less satisfied. Americans are pretty high up there, while the French are quite low - the world champions in life satisfaction are actually the Danes.
I used to hold a unitary view, in which I proposed that only experienced happiness matters, and that life satisfaction is a fallible estimate of true happiness.
Optimism is normal, but some fortunate people are more optimistic than the rest of us. If you are genetically endowed with an optimistic bias, you hardly need to be told that you are a lucky person - you already feel fortunate.
Courage is willingness to take the risk once you know the odds. Optimistic overconfidence means you are taking the risk because you don't know the odds. It's a big difference.
If owning stocks is a long-term project for you, following their changes constantly is a very, very bad idea. It's the worst possible thing you can do, because people are so sensitive to short-term losses. If you count your money every day, you'll be miserable.
Employers who violate rules of fairness are punished by reduced productivity, and merchants who follow unfair pricing policies can expect to lose sales.
Optimistic people play a disproportionate role in shaping our lives. Their decisions make a difference; they are inventors, entrepreneurs, political and military leaders - not average people. They got to where they are by seeking challenges and taking risks.
When you analyze happiness, it turns out that the way you spend your time is extremely important.
So your emotional state really has a lot to do with what you're thinking about and what you're paying attention to.
People are very complex. And for a psychologist, you get fascinated by the complexity of human beings, and that is what I have lived with, you know, in my career all of my life, is the complexity of human beings.
In a rising market, enough of your bad ideas will pay off so that you'll never learn that you should have fewer ideas.
All of us would be better investors if we just made fewer decisions.
There's a lot of randomness in the decisions that people make.