10 things I learnt from Ariely’s Predictably Irrational

It took me quite a bit of time to finish reading this book not because it is hopelessly dense with stuff that slides off the cranium, a symptom of excessive jargon, or because it was of garangutan length.

It took me time to look at human stupidity in the eye.

A book by a human on human irrationality fulfills my dose of irony for the day. Nevertheless, the author starts the book with his magnesium flare explosion which allowed him to observe human behaviour in the most routine yet unusual situations. Take, for instance, the removal of bandages in hospital when he was young. Nurses would yank the bandages off his burnt skin, leaving him to deal with sharp pain and sharper questions that never left the confines of the play pen of his head all along. How did the nurses know that stripping the bandage off quickly ensures lesser pain is inflicted?

Fact was, they didn’t. It was easier for them to deal with the task, as opposed to slowly peeling off bandages.

I harbour deep respect for the man because he has not stopped learning or asking questions.

When we read reviews before choosing to watch a movie, or ask friends admit a place before deciding to move, how can we not want to know about ourselves so that we don’t make the mistake we repeatedly do?

So here are nine things I learnt!

<1> We tend to think relatively more often than we think. While evaluating, it is easier with ‘comparables’ around, as opposed to none. He writes about what he calls the ‘decoy effect’.

What if you are single, and hope to appeal to as many attractive dating partners as possible at an upcoming singles event?

Ariely’s advice would be to bring a friend who has your basic physical characteristics “(similar coloring, body type, facial features)”, but slightly less attractive. Why?

Because the folks you want to attract will have a hard time evaluating you with no comparables around. However, if you are compared with a “-you,” the decoy friend will do a lot to make you look better, not just in comparison with the decoy but also in general, and in comparison with all the other people around. It may sound irrational (and I can’t guarantee this), but the chances are good that you will
get some extra attention. Of course, don’t just stop at looks.

If great conversation will win the day, be sure to pick a friend for the singles event who can’t match your smooth delivery and rapier wit. By comparison, you’ll sound great. Now that you know this secret, be careful: when a similar but better-looking friend of the same sex asks you to accompany him or her for a night out, you might wonder whether you have been invited along for your company or merely as a decoy.

<2> To make man covet a thing, it is only necessary to make that thing difficult to attain.

pearls

Continue reading

Advertisements

Color the sky in a chaos of purple

Second Lunch

Title Card

Thoughts on losing your creativity in the blogosphere.

I wanted my own digital sandbox to be wildly creative in. That’s why I started this site. I wanted to unshackle my imagination and make it rain humor filled content all over the place. But I’ll be honest with you. I also wanted as many people as possible to see the things I was making in my sandbox.

Like, just an absurd amount of people, you know?

Look at my blog

Actually, a better way of phrasing that is to say that I wanted as many people as possible to connect with the things I was making. Because I think all of us that create and share creative work on the internet crave that connection. It’s only human.

And since we’re human, we went ahead and conveniently found a way to quantify those connections in a manner that is both addictively gratifying and soul crushingly deflating…

View original post 828 more words

could the great Gatsby be greater?

I’ve just finished watching The Great Gastby as part of a mini-celebration of today being the last day of college.

It’s a shame to have been unable to read the book all the way through.

When movies take on the hard task of retelling a story on the screen, much substance is lost in the movie-making process. I can barely recall any right off the top of my head, that did a satisfactory job. Us chaps in the audience can be divided into two- Read The Book First and Saw the Movie First.

Most often, I have found myself in the former bracket, of those who have read the complete story, the bits that the silver screen cannot tell you about, not so much as whisper. On trips to the cinema, I would invariably be accompanied by someone who hadn’t read the inspiration behind the movie and a quasi elitist concern washed over me: how does it feel to not have known a story in its entirety? In its full magnificence?

Now that I have skipped over that line between Read The Book First and Saw The Movie First, I must say it is really not that pitiable. I guess being unaware of how much more… complete the story, the characters, their dilemmas and the foibles could be cushions the blow a movie is capable of dealing to you otherwise.

vlcsnap-2013-10-05-19h52m53s155

The Luhrmann’s version has whetted my appetite for the finer web of possibilities that grazed past, only to have few surge to the surface of the man’s life.

(the soundtracks sure seem out of place with the time the story the makers claim to be narrating it in)

As I steeled myself to watch how the movie ended: Daisy leaving with her family, unaware of Jay’s funeral, I realized how many things that depart unexplained in our eyes are the result of that which occurred- and that which did not.

Of course, I will know much better once I’m through reading the original work.

I haven’t really written in a long time, but maybe the night will spent poring over Gatsby’s story in ink. Who knows what fires the engines of the mind?