Cel mai intelept din incapere

by Thomas Gilovich

Bazată pe cele mai importante cercetări din psihologia socială



„Doi dintre cei mai străluciți psihosociologi din lume au concentrat înțelepciunea acestui domeniu în câteva lecții esențiale care ne permit înțelegerea structurii vieții noastre de zi cu zi. Un curs esențial, de care nu ați avut parte în facultate. Nu-l ratați a doua oară.“

Daniel Gilbert



„O carte care te învață mult mai multe despre ceilalți și despre tine însuți decât ți-ai fi putut imagina. Te va ajuta să înțelegi care este sursa celor mai mari succese şi a unora dintre cele mai presante probleme cu care ne confruntăm, de la rasism la atașament, de la fericire la comportamentul clientului, de la influențele media la conflictele internaționale, de la puterea de convingere la alimentația sănătoasă, de la eliminarea diferențelor educaționale la lupta împotriva schimbărilor climatice. Dacă vrei să fii mai înțelept, mai fericit și plin de succes (cine nu şi-ar dori?), ar trebui să citești această carte.“

Dr. Sonja Lyubomirsky



Thomas Gilovich este profesor de psihologie la Universitatea Cornell. De același autor: How We Know What Isn’t So, Why Smart People Make Big Money Mistakes (coautor) și Social Psychology (coautor).



Lee Ross este profesor de psihologie la Universitatea Stanford și cofondator al Centrului pentru Conflict și Negocieri de la Stanford. De același autor: The Person and the Situation (coautor) și Human Inference (coautor).

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction, Science, Self Help, Personal Development, Sociology, Business

336 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 2015

About the author

From Wikipedia:

Thomas D. Gilovich (born 1954) is a professor of psychology at Cornell University who has researched decision making and behavioral economics and has written popular books on said subjects. He has collaborated with Daniel Kahneman, Lee Ross and Amos Tversky.

Gilovich earned his B.A. from the University of California, Santa Barbara and his Ph.D. in psychology from Stanford University in 1981.

Reviews

[Trevor · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a book it is well worthwhile getting your hands on. I've read another book by Gilovich - How We Know What Isn't So - and have recommended it to lots of people since reading it. This one is interesting because it is basically a companion to cognitive errors we are likely to make and how to notice and avoid them. One of the main ideas in this book is that we see how we do things as being 'normal' and how everyone else does things as slightly strange. The example given is of how we perceive other people as drivers. Anyone who drives slower than we do is a bad driver since they are too cautious and therefore a bit dangerous because they are too tentative - and then anyone who drives faster than we do is a maniac. We do this with our assessment of other people's political views too - where we also inhabit the Goldilocks zone here too of being progressive enough to not be naïve and conservative enough to not be reactionary.

A lot of the mistakes we are likely to make in life are due to how available information is on the topic we are thinking about. There is a nice bit where they talk about whether East and West Germany were more or less similar to each other than Sri Lanka and Nepal. Ironically enough, East and West Germany proved to be both more similar to each other than Sri Lanka and Nepal were - and less similar, depending on how the question was asked. This is mostly because the people asked were more likely to know more about Germany that Asia and so they could call to mind many similarities and differences for one comparison, but hardly any for the other. This is interesting since we can pull together a whole range of 'facts' to support us saying opposite things, without noticing that the shortage of information we have for the other side of this comparison ought to be warning us to 'do more digging'.

One of the things they recommend is to try to see when you are disagreeing with someone over facts and when you are disagreeing over values - and this is obviously a really good thing to think about, but the problem is that it is easier said than done. It is a bit like saying we should walk in other people's shoes - yep, get that, also get it would be a really good thing for the world if more people did just that - except, well, no one ever quite explains how to do that in a way that isn't going to be more 'show' than reality. You know, that old joke about 'I've carefully paid attention to the rubbish you've been spouting for the last five minutes…' I know I'm not particularly good at this, but again, being told I would be a better person if I tried more doesn't really help.

All the same, the idea that we should force ourselves to hear the perspectives of others and to not think that others are just being hypocrites for holding the views that they do is a useful way to engage with the world - even if doing that always sounds so much easier than it proves to be in practice.

There is a nice chapter here on happiness and how we prove to be almost completely hopeless at figuring out what will make us happy - this is essentially a summary of The Happiness Hypothesis, and so getting hold of this book will more or less save you having to read that one.

There's also a nice chapter on the idea that behaviour what matters - you know, fake it till you make it, you are what you do. This is really hard for people, since we generally think we have an 'essential character' and so there are things we really 'don't do' - but this is mostly only true until we start doing them. Finding ways to 'act as if' you are something often leads to you being that. I don't mean this in the sense of 'calling out to the universe' but rather more along the lines of knowing that you are capable of changing and then acting in ways that will make that change more likely.

I like this book, it covers a lot of ground provides a lot of strategies to help us overcome patterns of behaviour that can undermine our ability to make a change in the world.

That said, there was an odd bit in this that made me stop. Let me quote it at length:

"An elderly psychiatrist who wanted to show his empathy for the Palestinian plight, if not for their specific goals, asked whether he thought Israelis and American Jews spent too much time obsessing about the Holocaust and not enough learning about and talking about the Nakba-the "catastrophe," a term that for Palestinians encompasses the founding of the state of Israel, the loss of the 1948 War, and the plight of the Palestinians who lost their homes, livelihoods, and, in many cases, their lives as a consequence.
The speaker paused, stepped down from the dais, and walked to within a few feet of the questioner. Then, looking the questioner directly in the eyes, he said, "Are you crazy? The Nakba was certainly a tragedy for Palestinians, and they continue to suffer from that injustice. But it was a tragedy of the sort that is all too common in the world and that many other peoples have suffered. The Holocaust was a unique and unparalleled tragedy-a defining event of the twentieth century." Then, wagging his finger at the questioner, he added, "Don't ever speak of them in the same breath again."

"The effect on the room was profound. People stared at the speaker in hushed silence; many looked back and forth at each other to see if others shared their sense of the moment. Although his dramatic response did not speak to the ongoing stalemate, it was clear to all that a new type of discussion-at least among those in the room-would now be possible."

Now, I'm not sure how to respond to this. I want to start by stating the obvious, or what I take to be obvious - that the holocaust was an obscenity and unjustifiable on any level. And I also understand that for the Palestinians it is essential that they seek to understand the impact the holocaust has had on the psyche of the Israelis if there is to be any hope of progress on peace. However, it isn't clear to me how this humiliation of the questioner might have helped produce a 'new type of discussion'. It also isn't clear to me how this would now allow Israel, which I take to have most of the power in the current situation, to take into consideration the feelings of the Palestinians. Even if the Nakba pales in historical significance beside the holocaust, the difference for the Palestinians is that they played no part in the holocaust, while the Nakba is understood by them to constitute their daily existence. This seems to me a bit like telling someone who is hungry that they should think of the starving millions of the world - and perhaps they should, but how will that actually help them with their immediate problems?

Still, it is a while since I read any books on cognitive errors and biases and how to recognise and try to avoid them - and this is one I would recommend as providing as good an introduction to the subject as any other.

[John Kaufmann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another in an excellent crop of books about social psychology in recent years (see my bookshelf brain-cogsci-socialpsych for others). Each emphasizes slightly different characteristics, and each uses different metaphors to present the information and help it stick. This one doesn't use the word "heuristic" so it sounds more like common sense than "psychobabble," (though it does describe some mental processes that others would label as heuristics). It also provides more concrete steps one can take to overcome some of our mental barriers - i.e., to become "the wisest one in the room." As I read this book, I thought it was one of the best in this genre. Not sure that's necessarily true - many of the books I've read along these lines have been excellent. But this is certainly up right up there. You can't go wrong with this one.

[Kristina Aziz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Two social psychologists created a book about emotional intelligence and self awareness in a way that is both easy to understand and academically sound. The authors play on the specific human idiosyncrasy that makes parables and anecdotes easier to understand and remember (what social psychologist worth their salt wouldn't?) While underlining their credibility with studies others have done.



My only complaint with this book is that it took forever to get to the point. After two or three examples and anecdotes I get the point. Move on to the how, to what was promised to me that I would read.

Anyone who is interested in psychology would probably love this book. If you do like this book, another recommendation is 'The Psychopath Next Door'.

Would I buy it for myself today? Probably not. Would I have six years ago when psychology books lined my shelves? Absolutely.

Final rating: 4/5

I received this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.

[Ahmed Samir · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great book that really helps put things in perspective making you a better communicator and debater and more conscious person of the role of psychology in everyday issues.

[Farha Crystal · Rating 2 out of 5]

I don't like the tone of the authors like " we hope, reading this book you could be ... ... ... (adjectives, they value ) ". However, part of me doesn't expect much from the "self-help" book.
Of course, if someone believes that a single self-help book could change a person's life like holy books then it's okay because it's their belief and sometimes "belief" could work as a placebo effect (-_-). But, one single book isn't enough to understand adequately about oneself let alone the rest of the world!

In fact, the book is okay but, the smug tone and the word choice "wise" on every page(almost) feels uncomfortable to me. They sound like the naive realists against whom they are making the *wiser points to understand and take action in real situations in a better or *more wiser way.

Perhaps, I would feel better if they would use "smart" instead of wise ( of course, in my dictionary "smart' and "wise" have little congruency ) because the former has the more applied value from the eyes of an activist angular to the author's horizon!

[Matt Zar-Lieberman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Originally posted on: http://www.batsarenotbugs.com/2015/12...

I normally really enjoy books like this, but I approached The Wisest One in the Room with more trepidation than usual. This was due to two specific words/phrases in the book's pesky subtitle (How You Can Benefit from Social Psychology's Most Powerful Insights): "How" and "Social Psychology." I'm not claiming that I'm often or even ever the wisest member of a room, I just dislike "how-to" books as they tend to have unappetizing content-to-fluff ratios and make for tedious reading. And while I find social psychology riveting, I worried that tackling such a broad subject would lead to a lot of overlap with other pop psychology books I had already read. Thankfully, both of these concerns turn out to be misguided for the most part. The Wisest One in the Room does tread over some similar topics to books like Predictably Irrational and Thinking, Fast and Slow but it also showcases some fascinating research conducted by its two authors and offers practical applications for such findings without ever remotely veering into self-help territory.

The book is organized into two parts. The first tackles the mental areas that make people "wise." These "pillars of wisdom" essentially concern understanding and acknowledging some of the foibles and quirks of human psychology, such as the fundamental attribution error and cognitive dissonance. Gilovich and Ross tend to stick to the usual pop psychology template of an introductory anecdote, a description of how the actual principle works, and then a synopsis of some relevant research studies and how they further illustrate said principle. This setup is executed well, and the authors are able to present enough examples of studies to ensure reader comprehension without ever feeling overwhelming.

These chapters do illustrate my biggest problem with the book, however, which is that the wide-ranging subject matter leads to some overlap with other popular books in the genre. Passages on the power of default choices (covered extensively in Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein's best-selling book Nudge) and Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky's groundbreaking research on heuristics and how humans are remarkably poor at making reasonable decisions (described in-depth in Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow which went similarly gangbusters (at least for pop psychology books) in terms of sales) explain important subjects vital to understanding human behavior, but they don't add much to anyone who has read those aforementioned parenthetically-cited books. Readers who are less familiar with the genre will get a lot more out of The Wisest One in the Room's initial chapters, though, and the authors need to cover such topics in order to properly set up the second half of the book. Additionally, for all my carping, I was pleasantly surprised by the amount of new material I picked up in the first half of the book, such as a fascinating study on how researchers were able to influence whether Israeli respondents found Sri Lanka and Nepal more or less similar to East Germany and West Germany merely by switching the question's focus from "more dissimilar" to "more similar." Fear not if you found my description of that study confusing. Gilovich and Ross are much better at writing about these things than I am and do a phenomenal job of describing studies, especially how researchers designed them to keep confounding variables in check.
The Wisest One in the Room really hits its stride in that second half, where the authors apply the learnings from the first section to major public policy and quality-of-life issues. The strongest chapters are on maximizing personal happiness and achieving effective conflict resolution. Unsurprisingly, these fall into the authors' wheelhouses (both are psychology professors: Gilovich at Cornell and Ross at Stanford, and the two have over 80 combined years in the field). Gilovich has done a variety of studies on the former topic, and he offers some practical and enlightening advice to improving personal satisfaction with life and making the most out of experiences, such as how short, very fun vacations provide more long-term contentment than longer but slightly less fun experiences. Ross is the co-founder of the Stanford Center on Conflict and Negotiations and has worked with the UN and leverages this expertise for a compelling chapter on what his research and expertise tells us about resolving conflicts between the most stubborn of parties. There are no workshops at the end of these chapters or any magic bullets or "5 Simple Hacks To Make You The Happiest Person Ever" lists (Social Psychologists Hate Him!) like in actual self-help books/clickbait. Rather, the authors understand life is complicated and instead humbly proffer some general advice, backed up by some fascinating studies, to help readers better understand a few major topics. While other chapters on improving at-risk schools and contending with global warming are slightly less absorbing, they still present some novel ideas and make for quality reading.

I'm pleased to say that The Wisest One in the Room considerably exceed my expectations by showcasing a handful of engrossing and obscure research findings and applying social psychology to a variety of broader societal problems. Some other pop psychology books have certainly touched upon how research insights can inform governments and citizens, but often not to such an extent, and rarely on the topics of personal happiness and negotiations. It's these unique features that make The Wisest One in the Room worthwhile reading for any pop psychology book fan.

8 /10

[Richard]

I caught the rebroadcast of the YouAreNotSoSmart podcast Why you often believe people who see the world differently are wrong and thought this might be worth reading.

[Dobre Cosmin · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 ★

[Leland Beaumont · Rating 4 out of 5]

Of the many definitions proposed for wisdom, perhaps the most intriguing is “seeing beyond illusion.” When most people are captivated by illusions, the wisest one in the room sees past them and proposes new solutions. The authors draw on recent research in social psychology, judgement, and decision making to help us become wiser. These insights help us see beyond five classes of compelling illusions that often mislead us. The second part of the book applies these wise perspectives to solving several important real-world problems.

These five “pillars of wisdom” are demonstrated with relevant research and clear examples in the first part of the book:

1) Illusions of objectivity — Naïve realism is the ubiquitous error of mistaking our perception of the world for an objective assessment of the world. Wise people recognize that their take on reality is only their own perception and not an objective assessment of the world as it actually is. This leads to the false consensus effect—a tendency to project your preferences onto a majority of people. Wise people recognize that bias affects them as much as it does others because most of the mental processes of perception operate automatically without our awareness. Wise people acknowledge their own perspective is no more valid than another’s.

2) The surprising power of subtle situational influence — Organ donation participation rates are close to 100 percent in countries that require people to opt-out and only about 15 percent in opt-in countries. Wise people know it is important to make the path from good intentions to effective action clear and simple. Nudges in the form of helpful options, honesty reminders, and removing obstacles on: retirement plans, saving money, recycling waste, tax filing, healthy eating, and lab experiments greatly influence the participation rates. Wise people understand the power of getting the ball rolling in the right direction. When we ignore situational influences we commit the fundamental attribution error and confuse situational influences with personal motivation, values, and character. To avoid confusing the person with the role, wise people withhold judgment until the situation is known.

3) The label frames the issue— “The names we give to plans, policies, and proposals determine what associations and images come to mind when we think about them.” In early 2000 the board of Ursinus College put this to the test by raising tuition nearly 20 percent. Applications soared, largely because prospective applicants see tuition costs as a proxy for the prestige of the school. Context, motivation, and timeliness influence the meaning we attach to various ambiguous stimuli. Understanding negativity dominance can help us evaluate alternatives framed as loses by considering the corresponding gains; understanding denominator neglect can help us fairly compare financial alternatives.

4) Beliefs follow from actions—“Once people have acted in a way that seems consistent with a particular belief, they are inclined to endorse that belief.” It can cheer us up to whistle while we work or to manage to smile when we might otherwise be feeling glum. The physical actions of social movements, whether for good or evil, nudge people toward adopting the beliefs of those already moving. “I act; therefore I believe.” Wise people follow their own well-chosen beliefs even if they must oppose the crowd.

5) Ideology blinds us to contrary evidence—“The information we can access most readily is often but a small fraction of the information we need, and often a biased sample at that.” Our intuitions automatically access this readily available, but incomplete information, “Many mistakes are made not because the right answer is too hard but because the wrong answer is too easy.” To overcome confirmation bias, wise people deliberately seek out evidence that contradicts their intuition.

The second half of the book applies these insights to analyzing and suggesting solutions to four pressing real-world problems. The problems addressed are: 1) What leads to human happiness and well-being? 2) What sustains human conflict? 3) How can at-risk populations be more effectively educated? and 4) What can we do to minimize global warming? These examples demonstrate how overcoming the frailties of ordinary thinking can help us arrive at new solutions to persistent problems.

This well-researched and thoughtfully presented book explores several mind traps that trick every one of us. The authors skillfully illustrate and apply relevant research with accessible examples. Although the book is more nearly an exposition of the research interests of the authors than it is an in-depth and comprehensive exploration of wisdom, it does provide clear guidance that can help any of us move forward on the long path toward wisdom.

[Jonathan Karmel · Rating 3 out of 5]

About 10 pages of this book are about naïve realism, and I would recommend those 10 pages. People believe that they see the world objectively and without bias, and people think that others will come to the same conclusions, so long as they are exposed to the same information and interpret it in a rational manner. People believe that others who do not share the same views must be ignorant, irrational, or biased. In fact, the average person is right an average amount of the time. Average people are not more rational than the people they disagree with. To believe that you have a better grasp on reality than the people you disagree with is naïve.

This book is a summary of many things you would learn in a social psychology class. I took social psychology in college, and I would recommend that everyone learn about this stuff. But I doubt that the people who know the stuff in this book are any "wiser" on average than those who don't. Ironically, the authors themselves appear to be naïve realists when it comes to others who are not well-versed in social psychology.

I thought this was interesting--For many centuries, before making someone into a saint, the Catholic Church appointed a promotor fidei or promoter of the faith, whose job it was to build a case against canonization-to speak out against the candidate's character, question the magnitude of the candidate's contributions to the faith and to humanity, and exercise skepticism with regard to any miracles the candidate was said to have performed. Pope John Paul II eliminated the practice of appointing a devil's advocate for canonization decisions and, predictably, the rate at which church members have been deemed worthy of sainthood has skyrocketed.

[TΞΞL❍CK Mith!lesh · Rating 5 out of 5]

The second half of the book applies these insights to analyzing and suggesting solutions to four pressing real-world problems. The problems addressed are:

1) What leads to human happiness and well-being?
2) What sustains human conflict?
3) How can at-risk populations be more effectively educated?
and
4) What can we do to minimize global warming?

These examples demonstrate how overcoming the frailties of ordinary thinking can help us arrive at new solutions to persistent problems.

This well-researched and thoughtfully presented book explore several mind traps that trick every one of us. The authors skillfully illustrate and apply relevant research with accessible examples. Although the book is more nearly an exposition of the research interests of the authors than it is an in-depth and comprehensive exploration of wisdom, it does provide clear guidance that can help any of us move forward on the long path toward wisdom.

[Sameer Alshenawi · Rating 5 out of 5]

كتاب احكم شخص في الغرفة: كيف يمكن ان تستفيد من أقوى أفكار علم النفس الاجتماعي" 2015، تأليف: دكتور توماس جيلوفيتش أستاذ علم النفس بجامعة كورنيل ، و دكتور لي روس أستاذ علم النفس بجامعة ستانفورد.

يجمع بين كتابين في كتاب واحد: الاول عن علم النفس الاجتماعي و الثاني عن اتخاذ القرار.
وضم الكتاب جزئيين الاول يتناول المزالق التي تمنعنا من الوصول الى الحكمة و الثاني عن تطبيق أفكار علم النفس الاجتماعي لاكتساب الحكمة

ويمكن ايجاز رسالة الكتاب فيما يلي :
الخمس دروس الاساسية التي يمكن ان نتعلمها من علم النفس الاجتماعي:
أ- المواقف بالغة التأثير
( situations are powerful)
على ما نفعله ونفكر فيه ونشعر به تجاه الاخرين، فقد تكرهني وتكره ما اكتبه اذا كنت تقرأه وانت محشور وسط مجموعة من الحمقى في احد ميكروباسات القاهرة الكابوسية.

ب- نحن لا نعرف، في الغالب، أسباب ما يفعله الأخرون. والغريب اننا نعتقد ان طريقتنا هي الأفضل والاصح، وان من يتبع وسيلة أخرى من الاخرين او يرى حكما اخر فهو منحازا او غبيا او مجنونا. والحقيقة ان اغلب احكامنا عن شخصيات ومشاعر الاخرين خاطئة وليست لها أساس من الصحة، ودائمة التكرار لدرجة ان علماء النفس اسموا هذا نوع من الأخطاء " خطأ العزو الأساسي
fundamental Attribution Error".

ج- نحن لا نعرف ما هو الذي لا نعرفه
we don’t know what we don’t know،
فعلى الرغم من عدم معرفتنا بطبيعة المواقف ودوافع الناس بل وكيف تؤثر المواقف علينا، فأننا لانعرف اننا لانعرف ذلك، ونطلق احكامنا بثقة كأننا العالمون بظاهر الامور وبواطنها.

د- لدى الناس دافعان اجتماعيان اساسيان: 1-الرغبة في ان نكون محبوبين، والحاجة الى الانتماء، 2- حن نرغب في أن نكون صادقين ومتَّسقين، ليس فقط في عيون الآخرين، بل في أعيننا وفي تفكيرنا عن ذواتنا. لا أحد يرغب أن يراه الآخرون كاذبًا

ه- على الرغم من كل ما نجهله والمغالطات العقلية الكثيرة التي قد نقع فيها، فان قدرتنا على تكوين بعض الاحكام الصحيحة عن الشخصيات التي نقابلها مبهرة جدا اخذا في الاعتبار قصر المدة التي نقابل فيها الشخص ونتعرف عليه (دقيقتان أحيانا).

كتاب رائع أوصي بشدة بقراءته

[Hataipat · Rating 5 out of 5]

ชอบมาก นึกว่าจะเป็นหนังสือเเนวself-help เเต่ไม่ใช่เลย เนื้อหาหลักๆพูดถึงความคิดในเเง่cognitionของคนในสังคมตั้งเเค่เรื่องเล็กๆน้อยๆจนถึงเรื่องการเมือง(ส่วนมากเป็นของเมกา ถ้าไม่อินก็อาจจะงงได้) สิ่งที่ชอบมากๆคือการอธิบายถึงnaive realismที่หลายๆคนเป็นเเต่มักจะไม่รู้ตัว ส่วนหลังๆจะเป็นเรื่องพฤติกรรมซะส่วนใหญ่มีพูดถึงงานทดลองบ้างประปราย ถึ��หลังๆเริ่มจะอ่านไม่รู้เรื่องเเล้วก็ตามเเต่โดยภาพรวมถือเป็นหนังสือที่ควรอ่านอย่างยิ่ง โดยเฉพาะคนที่ชอบเเสดงความฉลาดเเบบมั่นๆของตัวเองต่อสาธารณะจะได้ไม่เด้อนะจ๊ะ^_^

[Shannon · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good read for people new to the field

[Hussain Yhea · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book is talking about social psychology in general and how to use the knowledge extracted from the experiments to be wiser in ur decision making and in life

[Ben Aizenberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very interesting, definitely need to read it a few more times so that I remember everything

[Cody Allen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This past year has been highly politically charged and reading this book gave me a deeper understanding of the differences between the political parties and how their respective constituents have ideologically dug themselves in. Social psychology can teach us a lot about the current state of political trench warfare in this country. Gilovich and Lee write about numerous psychological principles, a first example being the False Consensus Effect: “People tend to think that their beliefs, opinions, and actions enjoy greater consensus than is really the case.” Think about how this principle (also known as consensus bias) is prevalent in today’s culture and how social media has exacerbated it to the nth degree. It’s easier than ever to connect with people who agree with your opinions regardless of whether you think Russia meddled in the presidential election or James Harden is the most over-rated player in the NBA. Your tribe is at your fingertips.

Another principle examined is Pluralistic Ignorance: “[This] phenomenon occurs whenever people hide their true thoughts and feelings because they have an exaggerated sense of how much others would disapprove.” This property examines the balance between voicing ones opinions and risking rejection by the group on the one hand and staying silent and safe yet disillusioned on the other. Human beings evolved to sacrifice for the greater good of the community. But which is the real sacrifice?

One of my biggest takeaways from this book was a new appreciation for the variety of different people’s perspectives on life. If two people go to a movie and one loves it and one hates it, both opinions are valid. They are both derived from the internal way that each particular individual viewed the film. These lenses and filters that people see life through are determined by the sum of their previous experiences, all adding up to who that person is in the present moment. While differing opinions about a movie are low stakes, we must remember to respect the variety of people’s perspectives when the stakes are high. Let’s take the political—and high stakes—example of affirmative action as our subject in this case.

When I first moved to Los Angeles, it was the with goal of building a career in comedy. I did all of the typical things one does in this field including performing stand-up, studying improv, auditioning for commercials and sitcoms, and writing my own scripts. The major television networks (NBC, ABC, Warner Bros, etc.) offer annual writing competitions for aspirational television writers and I applied 5 years in a row, from 2012-2017. There are 16 spots available, all ostensibly depending on who the judges deem to be the 16 best writers. At least, this is what is proposed by the submission guidelines, but a little digging suggests otherwise. At the end of each competition, one of the networks sends out a thanks-for-playing email with a photograph of the 16 winning writers attached. By the 5th year it became obvious that they were selecting winners based on a diversity quota. Year after year, the collection of winners was consistently 1-2 members of each race (white, black, hispanic, and asian) and roughly split in half by gender. Being a white male, I was realistically competing for 1 of maybe 2 spots, not 1 of 16. If I had known how slim my chances truly were, I probably would have thought twice before spending the countless hours I did writing and applying for the opportunity.

If we use this story as our ‘movie’, we can further examine two different resulting opinions. Person A (me) sees this movie and comes away upset at how affirmative action actively stunted their prospects at career advancement. Alternatively, Person B might see this movie and come to the conclusion that yes, affirmative action is working properly, because Hollywood needs more writers from different socioeconomic backgrounds in order to write better television for wider audiences. Depending on your political beliefs and your individual background, you might believe that Person A is right. Or you might believe that Person B is correct. However, the reality is that neither person is more correct or incorrect than the other. You cannot have a right and a wrong when it comes to matters of opinion. Applying labels like ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’ to a person’s subjective interpretations of the world around them is naive (especially when you consider the fact that you are judging them based on your own subjective interpretations of the world around YOU!)

This leads us into another principle of psychology known as Naïve Realism. Gilovich and Lee share how naïve realism is “the tendency to treat our sense of what’s out there as a matter of objective perception rather than subjective interpretation.” So, some people out there think this country has a desperate need for affirmative action legislation. Some people in this country think it hurts more than it helps. Like our aforementioned movie, when viewed through different lenses based on previous life experiences, both can be accurate, because it is subjective. This is paramount to keep in mind. When we give in to our naïve realism, and believe wholeheartedly that we see the matter objectively and people who oppose us do not, it can quickly become ‘my way or the highway.’ While two people can amicably disagree on a movie, when it comes to serious matters that directly affect the qualities of our lives, the outcomes are often less civil. I have had people tell me that I’m racist for not supporting universal affirmative action, and, even worse, tell me they believe James Harden to be a valuable basketball player!

Social psychology has a lot to offer in terms of actually coming to agreements as well. Our authors write how their “hope is that agreement will lead to a normalization of relationships, to the building of trust required for continued cooperation, and ultimately to a fruitful and sustained peace. In our experience, this gets matters backward. It is the reduction of hatred, the building of some degree of empathy and understanding, and the creation of more trusting relationships that make it possible to get signatures on an acceptable agreement.” Personally, I have come to believe that both elements must happen simultaneously, in a type of virtuous circle (the opposite being a vicious circle). Let’s look at depression as an example. When someone is depressed, one of the first signs is that they stop taking care of themselves. They stop showering and shaving and let the house become more and more messy. However, the reverse is also true. If you stop showering and shaving and picking up after yourself and start sleeping all day, you will become more depressed. They go hand in hand. Same, I believe, with empathy and agreement. The more you agree with someone the more you will be able to empathize with their point of view—the virtuous circle. And conversely, the more you disagree with someone, the less you will be able to empathize with them. That is the vicious circle. They each occur simultaneously, metaphorically holding hands.

My favorite quote from this book is attributed to Abraham Lincoln when he once remarked “I don’t like the man, I must get to know him better” about a political rival. Lincoln naturally understood the power of empathy and it made him a more effective leader. The power of this statement is magnified when you consider the divisiveness of the times during which he lived and presided. What if more people in our current societal climate had a similar attitude? What might we all be able to agree on that we currently can’t?

This book has a tremendous amount of knowledge and insight to offer, and although none of it is truly revolutionary (they are not breaking ground on any new theories and proposals, but more-so condensing them in a digestible format and giving compelling examples) it was a great knowledge booster. They cover tons of psychological tidbits all designed to make the reader a better and wiser person and although I only touched on a few in my review, there is a plethora of good information in this book. In summary, I will end with this quote taken right from the beginning on page 3: “A person can be ‘smart’ without being smart about people. But it makes no sense to say someone is wise if the person has no feel for people or no understanding of their hopes, fears, passions, and drives.” That said, I firmly believe that we must diligently do our best to continually understand others, acknowledge our own biases, and think deeply about existing circumstances if we are to become wiser individuals.

[Abdullah Almuslem · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked this book as part of me trying to diversify my reading list. This is in principle a psychology book. I found it a little boring with its academic way of presenting things. Numerous studies are presented in academic details to support the point and it would've been better for ordinary readers to have the conclusion rather than the actual experiment with its all details.

Then, there is the topic of the book, I just did not understand what the main idea of writing this book. It has many topics (Including a chapter on Global Warming !). In any case, I learned thing here and there from it. As in any psycology book, you will always find good lessons about the human behavior. Below Some quotes from the book I highlighted as I read through the book:

“Why can’t I be like everyone else?” As we grow older, such ruminations tend to shift from what is wrong or unique about me to what’s wrong with them.

People tend to think that their beliefs, opinions, and actions enjoy greater consensus than is really the case.

Individuals and groups involved in conflict are often urged to walk in one another’s shoes and try to see things through one another’s glasses.

Honesty or dishonesty may depend not only on the character of the person, but on the specifics of the situation that make dishonesty more or less tempting—and the norm of honesty more or less salient.

Writing a long paper (or a book!) can be difficult, but it’s easier once the writing threshold is crossed.

Most people, even those with a reputation for selfishness, are willing to “do the right thing” as long as they can expect others to do so as well (especially when others are watching).

If it costs a lot, they tell themselves, it must be good.

People who suffer for something will feel psychologically compelled to value it.

Many mistakes are made not because the right answer is too hard but because the wrong answer is too easy.

The confirmation bias runs deep.

If you want something to be true, you tend to seek out and seize on evidence to support it—and that if you don’t want something to be true, you seek out information that would call it into question.

We think something is true and act in ways that make it true

A brother insists that he would be the happiest man in the world if the person of his dreams says yes to a marriage proposal. The reality is that although such outcomes do bring joy, it is a joy that fades predictably, and often quickly, with the passage of time.

As Sigmund Freud put it in a letter to Carl Jung, “Work and love, love and work—that’s all there is.”

When research participants are asked to list their biggest regrets, they report more regrets of inaction than action by a two-to-one margin.

As Harvard social psychologist Joshua Greene put it, “The best way to get people to do something is to tell them that their neighbors are already doing it.”

[Jeanne · Rating 5 out of 5]

What does it mean to be wise? Thomas Gilovich and Lee Ross, in The Wisest One in the Room: How You Can Benefit From Social Psychology's Most Powerful Insights, define wisdom as "Wisdom involves knowing when the information available is insufficient for the problem at hand. It involves the recognition that how things are right now might seem very different down the road" (p. 4).

We look at the world and believe what we see (naive realism). What I love about psychology is that it opens up the world, challenges my naive ways of seeing it, and offers more helpful ways of seeing it. The corollary is that other people may see the same things that we do and, because they have different values and experiences than our own, see them differently. A wise person recognizes these biases influence others' perspectives – and our own. A wise person "recognizes that there are two sides of every coin: A vantage point that makes some things easy to see can obscure considerations that would be obvious from another perspective" (p. 44).

It doesn't take much of a stretch of imagination to see how doing this ability to see two sides to the coin would help us in our current difficult political climate.

This is one of five strategies that Gilovich and Ross describe in The Wisest One in the Room. I'm not going to describe each of these; instead, I encourage you to read, enjoy, and increase in wisdom.

Gilovich and Ross conclude their book by considering several parts of the world that can be informed by their model: happiness, group cooperation, helping underachieving students learn, and global warming. I know more about the first domains, so was most interested in global warming, which they refer to as "an even tougher problem for the world." They identify barriers to acting individually or nationally to decreasing global warming – but then describe why they remain hopeful about the future.

Like the rest of this book, this chapter was thought-provoking. I had talked with my students about the US election earlier in the week; we had concluded that one of the papers they should work on next semester would require them to apply their knowledge of psychological research to the election (or another topic of their choice). This chapter on global warming will be an excellent model of what I want them to do.

There are many books that purport to be psychology written for the general population. Many of them are not worth the paper they are written on. This one is. Read it, study it, use it.

[Mishaal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very insightful. This book does a good job in explaining biases and barriers in human thinking.

There is no one book that will make you the wisest in the room, but this will definitely add to your wisdom.

I probably would've given this a 5/5 if not for the annoying political examples. They talk about politics way too much.

[Yan Li · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked this book up by chance from a local library, and found the content surprisingly interesting and myself fascinated by the insights and anecdotes offered throughout the book. I took a long time finishing the book, for each chapter actually does make me ponder on the concepts, reflect on my way of viewing the world and show me fresh new perspectives. From naive realism to dissonance reduction, when the social psychologist explains the idea, they all make sense, but before reading the book, I have never consciously examined those social behaviors. I have never taken a psychology class in college, and from my perspective, this book opens a new world to me and triggered my interests in learning and reading more about social psychology, international relations, and other disciplinary of studies. I especially appreciate the numerous anecdotes and examples offered along with the main idea each chapter, and those really helped me to understand the idea on a deeper level. From Dwight Eisenhower to Nelson Mandela, those psych-wise figures in history set concrete role models for us to become wiser and better people. I also respect the authors on touching upon bigger social issues than merely teaching us how to gain more individual happiness and wisdom. The chapters on Israeli-Palestinian conflict, underperforming students in our education systems, the global warming issues lead the readers to think outside of our smaller self and looking at the world from perspectives of responsible global citizens.
This is not a how to quickly get you wise self-help book, but a profound and thoughtful book on social psychology. I highly recommend this book to anyone curious and interested in learning more about ourselves and others. I think this is a great book that offers a beginner-friendly intro, dabbles upon various topics and brings new perspectives. For me, this is also a valuable book that I am going to constantly come back to for wise and genuine advice!

[Dmitry · Rating 1 out of 5]

(The English review is placed beneath Russian one)

Я считаю название книги крайне неудачным, т.к. название предполагает книгу жанра self-help, но на деле это классический учебник по социальной психологии. Да и ещё с моей точки зрения, не очень удачный. Поэтому те, кто ищут именно что книгу по самопомощи, книгу в которой авторы действительно бы писали, как применить теоретические знания из социальной психологии в реальной жизни, с вероятностью 90%, не найдут ничего.
Я хочу особо подчеркнуть, что к самому тексту или лучше сказать, к сути того о чём текст, у меня претензий нет (к той первой половине книги, на которую меня лишь хватило). Всё о чём пишут авторы, это, как я уже сказал, чистая академическая социальная психология без каких-либо примесей, типа self-help. Именно поэтому меня и удивило название книги, её позиционирование.
Второй момент, это то, что классический учебник по социальной психологии намного больше и толще. Если у данной книги 360 страниц, то у книги Дэвида Майерса «Социальная психология» их больше 600. Т.е. как видим, авторы либо сократили количество тем, либо сократили объяснение материала, существенно его сжав. И честно сказать, я склоняюсь скорее ко второму варианту. Или возможно авторы и сократили количество тем и само объяснение, т.к. с лично моей точки зрения книга получилась довольно сухой и скучной. Возможно тут та же проблема, с которой сталкивались многие люди. Когда мы только открывает для себя такое направление как, скажем, социальная психология, то первая хорошая книга на эту тему – книга, которая не только хорошо и ясно написана, но которая затрагивает все вопросы, которая максимально комплексная, она, в итоге, становится как-бы нашим мерилом всех остальных и если попадётся точно или почти точно такая же книга, то мы часто остаёмся менее впечатлёнными ею. В лучшем случаи, если вторая книга настолько же качественная, как и первая, мы часто забывает её содержание, т.к. книги просто сливаются. Именно это произошло у меня с книгой Зимбардо «Социальное влияние», которая шла ровно вслед за первой моей книгой по теме социальной психологии – «Социальная психология» Дэвида Майерса. И если речь зашла об этой книге и этом авторе, то я просто советую прочитать именно её, а не эту. Содержание двух книг ничем не отличаются, но книга Майерса, хоть и в два раза толще, читается она намного легче, интересней и охватывает все темы социальной психологии. А что касается этой книги, то, увы, у меня как-то совсем не пошла.
Касаемо содержания могу сказать, что какой-то чёткой темы, кроме самого вопроса социальной психологии, там нет. Книга поделена на несколько глав, в каждой из которой автор рассматривает важные направления в социальной психологии, описывая сначала теорию, а потом предлагая множество примеров. Некоторые интересные, некоторые нет. Ну, вот возьмем, например, тему конформизм. Что первым приходит в голову? Правильно. Эксперимент Милграма. И вот половину главы автор будет описывать сам эксперимент и теорию. Для того, кто совсем незнаком с социальной психологией, это всё станет крайне интересным, однако для того, кто уже раз десять читал про Милграмма и его эксперимент, это будет всё скучно.
Поэтому повторюсь, я рекомендую вместо этой книги прочитать работу Дэвида Майерса «Социальная психология».

I find the title of the book inappropriate, because the title suggests a self-help book, but in fact it is a classic textbook on social psychology. And also from my point of view, not very successful. Therefore, those who are looking for a book on self-help, in which the authors would really write how to apply theoretical knowledge of social psychology in real life, with a probability of 90%, will find nothing here.
I want to emphasize that I don't have any objections to the text itself or to the essence of what the text is about (to the first half of the book that I read). All the authors write about is pure academic social psychology without any impurities, such as self-help. That's why I was surprised by the title of the book, its positioning.
The second point is that the classic textbook on social psychology is much larger and thicker. If this book has 320 pages, then David Myers' book "Social Psychology" has more than 600 pages. That is, as we can see, the authors have either reduced the number of topics, or reduced the explanation of the material, significantly reducing it. And frankly speaking, I am more inclined to the second option. Or maybe the authors also reduced the number of topics and the explanation itself, because from my personal point of view the book turned out to be quite dry and boring. Perhaps there is the same problem, which faced many people. When we are just discovering such a direction as social psychology, the first good book on the subject is a book that is not only well and clearly written, but which covers all the issues that are as comprehensive as possible, it eventually becomes as if our measure of all the other similar books, and if we come across the same book exactly or almost exactly the same, then we often remain less impressed with it. At best, if the second book is as good as the first one, we often forget its content, as the books simply merge. That's what happened to me with "The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence" by Philip G. Zimbardo, which followed my first book on social psychology, "Social Psychology" by David Myers. And if it's about this book and this author, I just recommend that you read it ("Social Psychology" by David Myers), not this one (The Wisest One in the Room). The content of the two books is no different, but Myers' book, although twice as thick, is read more easily, more interestingly and covers all the topics of social psychology. And as for this book (The Wisest One in the Room), alas, I did not like it at all.
As for the content, I can say that there is no clear topic other than the question of social psychology. The book is divided into several chapters, in each of which the author considers important directions in social psychology, describing first the theory and then offering a lot of examples. Some are interesting, some are not. Well, let's take, for example, the topic of conformism. What is the first thing that comes to mind? That's right. The Milgram experiment. And here is half of the chapter where the author will describe the experiment and the theory itself. For someone who is completely unfamiliar with social psychology, it will all become extremely interesting, but for someone who has already read about Milgram and his experiment ten times, it will be boring.
So I repeat, I recommend that you read David Myers' work "Social Psychology" instead of this book.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

For me, the utility of books like The Wisest One in the Room is measured by the degree to which they highlight systematic defects in thought that lead to poor decision-making. By this standard, this book does a good job explaining two common sources of bias: naive realism and the fundamental attribution error. Naive realism refers to our tendency to believe that our perceptions are, in fact, reality. This bias is often compounded by the fundamental attribution error, which refers to a belief that others' failures are caused by defects in their character/abilities while our own failures are caused by situational factors. The core point of the book is that each of us can get "wiser" by recognizing and controlling for these tendencies in our own beliefs and behaviors.

[Ogi Ogas · Rating 2 out of 5]

My ratings of books on Goodreads are solely a crude ranking of their utility to me, and not an evaluation of literary merit, entertainment value, social importance, humor, insightfulness, scientific accuracy, creative vigor, suspensefulness of plot, depth of characters, vitality of theme, excitement of climax, satisfaction of ending, or any other combination of dimensions of value which we are expected to boil down through some fabulous alchemy into a single digit.

[Ellen Pilch · Rating 1 out of 5]

I was hoping this was a self-help book with tops on how to appear intelligent. I felt like I was reading a college textbook when I read this. I am sure it would make an excellent college text for Psychology students. I did not enjoy reading about all kinds of studies and their findings. I just wanted a list of things to do and this was not it.

[Aly · Rating 3 out of 5]

Did I learn things from reading this book? Yes. Things that can be useful. There are sections that I enjoyed reading. However, reading some sections feels like it's just going on and on. This makes it hard to read. I almost give up reading this book and the only thing that kept me going is because once I paused reading this, I'd never go back and finish it.

[Rachel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found the first half of the book to be pretty fascinating. Lost some interest in the second half. It definitely had good takeaways.

[Emily · Rating 4 out of 5]

¨The Wisest One in the Room¨, by Lee Ross and Thomas Gilovich, is about how everybody's mind is different and we all think different things. In each chapter the authors explain how the concept they're talking about can help you become wiser. When Lee Ross and Thomas Gilovich say ¨wise¨, they do not mean IQ, instead they were talking about more social smarts. ¨A person can be smart without being smart about people, but it makes no sense to say someone is wise if the person has no feel for people or no understanding of their hopes, fears, passions, and drives.¨ Basically what they're saying is that intelligence is being able to take in information and process it but being wise means you're able to go beyond the information that you have at hand. Lee Ross and Thomas Gilovich believe that this self-help book will help you see more clearly and help you make better decisions.


This book contains nine chapters, each talking about different things that Lee Ross and Thomas Gilovich think can help you become wiser. A couple of chapters that I found interesting were chapter 5 and chapter 8. Chapter 5 is about the filters and lenses of personal experience that can blind people to reality. It talks about how the information most readily available is often not the best. The authors believe that an, ¨important part of wisdom is knowing when to trust intuition and knowing when to be leery.¨ A wise person should be aware of things that can make them narrow minded and to try and break them down to see what's hiding. Chapter 8 is about problems facing minorities in school. It talks about how different minorities in school and sports think differently about themselves because of how they are stereotyped. The authors show this by telling us about an experiment that was conducted by Claude Steele. In this experiment, the investigators gave African American and caucasion students identical tests. The only difference is what they told each group they were testing. Some students were told the test was an intelligence type test and another group was told it was a problem solving test. African Americans students did better on the test when it was introduced as a problem solving test, but the caucasion kids performed basically the same on both tests. The students´ own thoughts about their intelligence affected their performance.


Personally, I found this book very interesting. I enjoyed the many insights that it gave and I particularly enjoyed reading about the studies that proved their points. There were many thought provoking ideas that I never would have considered before reading this book. Therefore, I actually feel a little wiser having read this book! Even though this book was very interesting and I quite liked it a lot, I will only give it 4 stars because I'm not a big fan of self-help books.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gilovich discusses many important findings in social psychology through his years in the field and talks about how an understanding of these ideas can help lead all of us to make wiser choices in our every day lives. The primary focus of the book is cognitive biases that distort our thinking, naive realism and fundamental attribution error chief among them. In the FAE, we are quick to attribute another's behaviors and preferences that differ from ours to an internal shortcoming of that person instead of the surrounding environment that often dictates a person's attitudes. Many of us would behave similarly if presented with the same circumstances as the person with whom we disagree yet we fail to realize it. In our own lives, we tend to blame our poor choices on the environment (in some sense to reduce dissonance) or we are otherwise cognizant of the degree to which our decisions are determined by context, but we seldom give others the same benefit of the doubt. Equally powerful to the FAE is naive realism. In NR, we simply believe the world exists independent of our perception in exactly the same way that we perceive it; what we see is what is there. Many failures across society can at least in part be derived from an inability to recognize that our perception of reality is only a perception and others may not see things the same way we do. In the "Keyholes, Lenses, and Filters" section, Gilovich dives into why we may not be seeing problems in their entireties and the extent to which our pre-existing attitudes affect our perceptions of reality.

The author explains the power of the default option in decision making using the opt-in/opt-out organ donor choices in European nations to show the power of "nudging"; the default selection powerfully influences behavior. He also discusses the nature of happiness and uses evidence to support the commonly held idea that experiences, not material goods, make us happier. In this intriguing part of the book, the "peak-end" idea is introduced, whereby we most remember the apex and the conclusion of a vacation or experience.

The author discusses how distorted thinking manifests itself in geopolitical conflicts, negotiations, and pertinent political conversations like climate change.

A fascinating section of the book pertains to intransigence in negotiations. Specifically, compromises desired by one side are immediately devalued once presented by the other side in negotiation; bias persists that those across the table are trying to pull one over on us. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a lack of resolution is partly a result of biases whereby one side is reluctant to accept accommodations offered by their opponent despite their usefulness.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is one of those popular psychology books which bombard you with studies and examples, half of which you have heard before in other settings, to imprint into you an idea of how the human brain works in different situations. The authors here, distill those studies into a few condensed ways of "wisdom" one can and should have. This is not a "these are the main components of wisdom" kind of book, rather than a "these are some common components of wisdom we have come across" kind, however - making wisdom into this types of behavior and thinking is for me a bit unfocused.

The second part of the book broadens up and goes from a lot of studies into bigger picture questions. Here one loses the idea of being the wisest in the room - and more into how to be wise in regards to the big questions in general. It gets a bit too lofty, but the second part is superior to the first.

This book needeth not to have been about wisdom, it is more the common gimmick they put things under - and some is just common sense and proven behavioral traits we should seek to embrace. I'm not even sure if I trust the authors when they begin embedding politics into the mix... as if the bombardment of studies was not enough to put me off - because I see that kind of books as try to look at studies in a way that match the narrative of the authors. The studies are picked - counter studies or the ambiguities are not discussed so that the book loses it's scientific edge(although I'm sure most is accurate, I'm just not able to evaluate all sides).