Reading Reflection No. 2

1) What was the general theme or argument of the book?

The general theme of the book is that there are two modes of thought in how we process information. One being fast, which is emotional and instinctive processing and decision making. The other is slow, which is processing based on logical and methodical reasoning. The first type of thinking (fast) is the one that influences most of our judgement and thinking, much more than we believe. Kahnenman, the author, argues that system two (slow) will act as a monitoring system for system one, in which it is support, encourage, or suppress behavioral ideas proposed by system one (the faster judgement). 

2) How did the book, in your opinion, connect with and enhance what you are learning in ENT 3003?

The book provides an understanding for how we as entrepreneurs can make decisions and which way to make decisions is most effective given different circumstances. It helps enhance the mode of understanding in which cases is it best to think fast or slow, given the circumstances presented to an entrepreneur. Some instances it may be better to rely on system one mode of thought and trust your instinct for how risky an entrepreneural project may be. On the other hand, it may be better to rely on logical thinking for a project that has less risk. 

3) If you had to design an exercise for this class, based on the book you read, what would that exercise involve?

The exercise I would design would require students to practice slow and fast thinking. I would create an exercise that presents problems or opportunities (possibly specific to an entrepreneurship setting), and then require students to give answer/solutions to these (or their opinion on the viability of the opportunities) using both modes of thought. Then compare and contrast the answers given and assess the differences between arriving at both answers using the two systems. 

4) What was your biggest surprise or 'aha' moment when reading the book? In other words, what did you learn that differed most from your expectations?

I did not expect system one to have that much dominance in terms of how often we use it. It makes a lot of sense, considering human beings are not completely rational creatures, but rather often reason from their hearts and are prone to biases. It was illuminating to learn that system two often supports and checks in on system one, which validate a lot of my understanding of human nature. We first develop a gut and instinctive opinion and then use reason to understand it or keep it. The way the two systems work together was very different from my expectations.