fkw1979

I realized a few things with this one today so I thought I'd share. This one I had not given much attention to but it is more important than I realized. Mungers mention of it in his essay is quite short so that is probably one of the reasons why, both in his lack of depth in explanation and the amount of time spent on discussing it. This goes specifically to his frog in the pot analogy. That tiny changes slowly increased over time will often lead to what is an almost predictable trend in to greater stronger behavior in that direction over time that is almost unnoticable as it feels quite natural in the person being influenced. As a lawyer, this is where the typical "slippery slope" analogy we like to use comes in. This could potentially include and explain: 1) lying- small innocent lies eventually leading to bigger and bigger ones, including both ones you tell to yourself and ones you tell to others 2) committing of crimes- petty crimes eventually escalating to felonies or robbery 3) hatred 4) anger 5) negativity 6) mob behaviour 7) violence toward others Despite the above, I don't think it is all negative. I believe and Munger does not seem to mention that this also can be purposefully used in the other more positive directions: 1) kindness- small acts of kindness, making you a kinder human being so that you better understand it, which leads to larger acts 2) love- small acts of love, helping you understand love better, which leads to being a more loveable person 3) generosity 4) positivity I think when you understand this and our natural proclivities as human beings, I would hope it would make you much more kinder to those that have fallen victims to it in harmful ways and at the same time want to utilize this model in ways that helps and is a positive force for good. As for how it applies to business, I would utilize these truths when evaluating management and be forewarned if you see the beginning of warning signs that arise and give due consideration to the fact that is and will likely escalate in severity over time.

I did not give this one much thought when I first discovered Munger's essay but over time I realize how important it is to understand and give attention to. The world is very complex and difficult to understand. The more you know, the more you realize how little you know. We all act as if we know the answers and like to show people we do (excessive self regard & doubt avoidance). This is often twaddle especially if you do not know it as well as you think you do and therefore talk with certainty when you are wrong or at least incomplete in your assessment of your opinion. Truth is we all engage in this to some degree whether we admit to it or not. Accepting that in itself is a good lesson to take from this if anything. One should try to guard against it in ourselves. First you look like an idiot to others that know better than you and second you are often pounding in the false or incomplete opinion in your own mind (we decide must hold it in our mind because we want to remain and seem consistent and trustworthy even to ourselves) which is more harmful than productive if you wish to be more rational in life. Also we must be able to see it in others. People will talk just for the sake of talking and others will listen. Especially in today's age of shock awe fake news. It is influencing others who know less or more easily susceptible to group think. The key here is pointing out who is engaging in twaddle that is harming others and ignoring them or shutting them down. Munger mentions it is important to keep those engaging in twaddle from interfering with those who know what they are doing and are doing serious work. This seems to be important more now than ever because everyone has a voice and its ability to be projected across large groups of people is more easier than it has ever been. As for how it applies to business, you want to separate management that engages in twaddle from those that shun it both in themselves and in their business and culture. You want to feel confident they have the right employees in the right positions especially in a business whose model depends on adjusting and adapting to change quickly in a fast changing world.

The remedies for stress are good suggestions as ways to put you in a daily state of mind that is best able to cope with the stresses that come about during life. These are great tools one can use to keep you in a calm and peaceful state. As opposed to walking around neurotic all the time. Which person do you think will be better able to handle and cope with stress when it comes about during each person's day? So they are relevant imo. Meditating on what is going on in the moment and within yourself may also be helpful during times of stress. Being mindful of what is going on objectively instead of personally being deeply "in it" can probably help. Now if you are getting chased by a bear or someone with a machete, that might not be very sensible so you probably want to focus on getting away, but most situations in life are not that urgent. One other thing. Most people make their decisions based on emotion or a feeling and then justify it in their minds subconsciously with logic. Some do this more than others. Mindfulness is one way to deal with this.

Not only can stress cloud the ability to think rationally but perhaps the greatest most pernicious harm of stress is the type that is so extreme that it rewires your brain causing it to misfunction. This can probably explain why there are people who grow up crazy and violent coming from very stressful environments at home as a child, why people who come back from war suffer from PTSD, and how people can be so brainwashed they will think their loving parents are trying to kidnap them and instead run into the hands of a crazy cult. Regarding stress and it's threat of clouding your thinking, I am guessing that is one reason why Buffett works out in Omaha and not in NY and Wallstreet. It is also probably why he does not have a computer in his office. Set up your environment such that it encourages the activity you find productive and avoids the type of activity that pose a risk to your work. Buffett is rational to a T. This is a perfect example of this.

Good topic for today. Obviously I am speaking in generalization but I do believe there is some truth though not absolute to what I state below. There is no offense meant, just my opinion. Today we are in a time of polarizing politics and with that it can get quite contentious. Liberals tend to be a bit more feelings (agreeable) oriented and a bit more on the perceiving side whereas the conservatives tend to be a bit more thinking/logical and conscientious. This creates a very interesting dynamic where each side tends to naturally see their way and have difficulties seeing how the other person cannot see what they see. Just the topic of systemic racism itself and does it exist is a very emotional polarizing issue. It involves morality, racism, fairness, and those who believe that the denial of the humanity of a group, if quite agreeable in nature, may find themselves feeling very strongly about the injustice. Add to just the general environment today, where the gap between the rich and poor is widening, people are worried about their future survival (global digital competition, immigrants and cheap labor overseas taking jobs, automation taking jobs), people feel like capitalism has failed them, they feel the government (President, House, Senate, Judiciary) have all failed them, they feel intense anxiety over their safety and Covid, they've been locked up in their house or their parents house for weeks, and to top it off all their life they have been telling those systematically oppressed it was their own fault. You can see why one might feel obligated if not determined to speak up and fight right now. To add to that, think about FOX news or CNN. People easily mistaking facts for opinion. Lots of opinion from salesmen (commentators) trying to sell a narrative and that just fuels it more. And lastly, you have social media. Built on an algorithm that sends you very compelling stuff that they can tell you already like and then you have consistency, social proof, reason respecting and a whole bunch of other biases kick in and further fuel your anger and fear and embolden you to the cause. This goes both ways obviously which is why you see the racists, the guns and the confederate flags out. So there is fake news where you know the exact purpose is to enrage and misinform and many people can't tell the difference. And then you also have content producers, who learn early that to get the most engagement, they need to turn up the dial a bit. This may be done intentionally, but often unintentionally if you are not really paying attention to what you are doing and most don't because we naturally crave the engagement most. No wonder it is so hard for people to stay rational. And yet that is what we need today. And then we have no leaders that are worth following any more. No leaders who set the proper example. So we have to try to best navigate it on our own. And that can be a very very messy thing especially when you can see the things the other side is saying are clearly not true. So is today. --------------------- Obviously we need better leaders. Ones worth following that are informed, rational and have good intentions. To expect people to be able to do all the work and be smart enough to work through such a complicated subject such as the one we are dealing with today is not likely for the masses. And you are right Longhaul, we need to consciously put in the effort needed to see the other's good side first, which obviously can be more difficult in some cases than others, and which may often require putting in the work to find and talk to someone rational and credible on the other side to see what you are missing.

I can think of your open mind reference, strong beliefs loosely held, natural doubt avoidance lolapalooza, and the fact the more you do it, repeat it internally, or out loud, or even stronger out loud to others the tighter the door closes shut so to speak. Probably requires active energy, intention and awareness to avoid this. I also believe you can use to establish good habits or character traits such that you can use it to your advantage such as saying out loud and repeatedly and meaning what you say, for example saying “I am a non smoker” if you wish to quit. Inversion in the form of “in what way may this not be true” may also be a helpful exercise.

Here's a good one that took me a long time to learn. The key to rationality is flexibility in mindset. To never hold too hard on to your opinions b/c when you stop doing that you stop learning new things and getting smarter. This is essentially the antidote to consistency / commitment which is one of the strongest forces but really it is probably a much larger and stronger negative lolapalooza which is why it may be so hard to avoid doing. It involves: commitment, consistency, doubt avoidance, incentive, easily accessible, reason respecting, twaddle, excessive self regard and just the natural tendency of feeling discomfort when trying to hold two opposing views in your head at once. Perhaps that in itself is a consistency + incentive + doubt avoidance lolapalooza. Think about this one. This might be one of the most important things I have ever learned. PS As an aside, the world is made up of complex systems everywhere and when you understand how complex systems really work you realize how hard it is to "fully" grasp many things in life. The lolapalooza itself is a perfect example of a complex system working. That is why reasoning before understanding the idea of complex systems is so hard. It often is not just one thing that is involved when analyzing a problem, so if you are working on the premise that most of the things that you tackle are simple systems, you are like the proverbial one-legged man in an ass kicking contest. LOL Longhaul, I may be jumping the gun talking about lolapalooza but like I said in my previous post when I see doubt avoidance it is always in a lolapalooza =) Lolapallooza- a complex system made up of many inputs of varying degrees which feed on itself creating a stronger force through synergy via a positive or negative feedback loop (Note: lolapaloozas can be positive or negative, you want to avoid the negative ones and utilize the positive ones; we need to think more in terms of lolapaloozas not one bias separately from another when trying to fully get at a problem involving complex systems, the world is mostly made up of complex systems so to look at a problem with the simple system "tool from your toolbox" is probably pretty low in usefulness and accuracy.)

I see doubt avoidance all the time. When I do, it’s usually a lolapalooza. I think that may also be a reason that it is so hard to avoid.

Re Jurgis comment, pros and cons list seems like good idea and then properly weigh them, I believe that may be the Ben Franklin approach, it may be helpful when weighing to ask yourself "What's really important to me to consider in this situation and why?", here clarity is key, if you don't know what you really want or what really matters most then that's a problem unless it isn't

In working and interacting with others which is net-net a win in life, other people's reputations matter, integrity and rationality of the other person matter, your opportunity cost matters and perhaps accepting some imperfection in transactional exchanges would be rational, the time value of your money matters, understanding how other people are biased and that it is very hard to be rational and non-biased matters, testing them & initiating short trial periods matter, giving people some slack matters, and understanding people are imperfect and that's often ok in the grand scheme of things. Rational people make rational decisions given the circumstances and that is personal to each person. See the world for what it is and watch your back especially when it matters to you most. Seeing it from the other parties point of view and how they may be thinking at that moment as well as considering some of the above depending on the circumstance is probably a good start.

Great topic! All good info stated above. Here are my 2 cents: When it comes down to it we want to do what is in our best interest. That in itself is driven by incentive. We seek desire and that which we like and think helps us and shun pain and that which we think can harm us. That just might be the most basic fundamental building block of our genes, humanity and our species. I think that may be a first principle from which everything else is derived. So maybe the next question is so what is in our best interest. And that is subjective. If you define it and follow it it can guide you. If you do not define it your impulses and your pleasure may come to control you and then you may have all the biases come in to justify it (confirmation, pain avoiding denial, doubt avoidance, incentive caused bias, easily accessible, excessive self regard, twaddle, stress misinfluence, liking, reason respecting...). Because our mind works this way, we should probably do everything we can to avoid this path because the lolapalooza is so strong. Why wouldn't you? So if we can recognize and avoid that, then we should address what is in one's best interest. And that I believe each person must answer that themselves. You must ask what do you value. What is important to you? What kind of person do you want to be? How do you want to live your life? In a way which you will be personally proud of yourself (inner scorecard)? How do you want to be remembered? Rationality seems like the most logical thing to seek. To make the right decisions based on the facts of the situation. To do it because it is right. Then you have to define what is right for you. Right for your inner self and what you deem important and an important way to live given the way the world works. Perhaps right in the way you treat others and how it often gives you back so much more when done right. That's another longer conversation but something each person should do. Some people may value money above all. That is their right, but I believe if they really went to first principles, if they dug deeper and asked the right questions until they got to the most basic fundamental premise for money, they would often find out they have been wrong. And that in itself can be a very valuable thing.