Talking to strangers-- Malcolm Gladwell-- Lukewarm

I wonder why I'm still reading Gladwell.

The short answer is he gets me thinking. Please see this post for a more thorough breakdown of my thoughts on reading or now reading this author. This book certainly falls into the same category.

Beyond the usual tropes of confusing correlation and causation, and the predictably good storytelling there are a few basically correct and simultaneously good conclusions to be drawn from this book.

People aren't very good at interpreting what strangers are thinking or who they are. We are much worse at it than we think. (contrary to the authors earlier assertions in Blink). Nevel Chamberlin's confidence that Hitler was "trustworthy" is a good case-in-point. Gladwell also drew in some statistical evidence from criminality cases etc.

Certain types of people are intrinsically more suspicious. This might be due to personality, this might be due to profession. Most people tend to error on the side of trust( Type II error), some people, particularly cops and fraud specialists, error on the side of caution (a statistical type I error).

Gladwell concludes that's it's better to error on the side of Trust (much of the book is about police erroring on the side of caution) but I'm confident that is an insufficiently nuanced view. Read some Clancy if you have doubts.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The righteous mind — Jonathan Haidt — Recommend with salt

Image
  The book in a nutshell is captured by the subheading "why good people are divided by politics and religion". The book can be roughly divided into thirds. The first half of the book is about the origins of morality. Where did it come from? Haidt touches on some philosophical works and debates and ultimately concludes that morality provides evolutionary advantages, and it supersedes reason. He uses an elephant and a rider analogy, morality, roughly equated to emotion, is the elephant. He also uses a president and press secretary metaphor, which I found helpful, reason's primary function is to rationalize the conclusions of the subconscious. I'm not sure this story fully explains morality. I think it could explain some of it, and it provides some satisfying guidance but tas far as I can tell it does not obviate the need for extra-human deliberate construction of morality. Second, he outlines what morality is and isn't. He rejects utilitarianism and deontology as to...
Read more

The Sum of All Fears-- Tom Clancy

Image
The Sum of all fears  It’s classic Clancy. This one is particularly interesting in terms of the breadth of the problem and players. It’s very human and the technical details are as compelling as always. It also highlights the potential danger of MAD (mutually assured destruction) policy in a very penetrating way.  Check out my general Clancy post for a broader take on this series. Verdict Recommend
Read more

Foundation -- Isaac Asimov -- Lukewarm

Image
I read this because people I admire talked about it (Elon musk, Orson Scott Card, Ben Shapiro). It's classic science fiction in an ancient context. It was published in the 50s, 15 years before the earliest start trek, 25 years before star wars, and 35 years before Enders game, all of which are ancient history. In many ways, it belongs to the era of   Edgar Rice Burroughs'  Prince of Mars or even H.G. Well's War of the Worlds more than it does modern science fiction. That being said, there are some truly brilliant ideas explored in the text. First, the book doesn't follow a protagonist, which means no character development and no human story. Instead, Asimov overtly follows humanities' story, jumping from viewpoint to viewpoint and century to century in galactic civilization. In some ways, it reads more like a collection of short stories in Sanderson's Cosmere or perhaps even something from the MCU, but the novel still manages to drive a narrative crafted aro...
Read more