Quotes About Decision-making

First, people are generally rational, and their thinking is normally sound. Second, emotions such as fear, affection, and hatred explain most of the occasions on which people depart from rationality.

Loss aversion is a powerful conservative force that favors minimal changes from the status quo

The law (of least effort) asserts that if there are several ways of achieving the same goal, people will eventually gravitate to the least demanding course of action. In the economy of action, effort is a cost, and the acquisition of skill is driven by the balance of benefits and costs. Laziness is built deep into our nature.

An unbiased appreciation of uncertainty is a cornerstone of rationality—but it is not what people and organizations want. Extreme uncertainty is paralyzing under dangerous circumstances, and the admission that one is merely guessing is especially unacceptable when the stakes are high. Acting on pretended knowledge is often the preferred solution.

Averaging two guesses by the same person does not improve judgments as much as does seeking out an independent second opinion. As Vul and Pashler put it, "You can gain about 1/10th as much from asking yourself the same question twice as you can from getting a second opinion from someone else." This is not a large improvement. But you can make the effect much larger by waiting to make a second guess.

Maintaining one's vigilance against biases is a chore—but the chance to avoid a costly mistake is sometimes worth the effort.

Claims for correct intuitions in an unpredictable situation are self-delusional at best, sometimes worse.

My ideal viewer is an 11-year-old girl who, like me, was once reading a book by Jean Plaidy and might be in the position of deciding what to make of the world and what to do with her life.

My own experience is that the best outcomes are reached when opposing viewpoints are clearly and strongly presented before decisions are made.

I'm very much a team-oriented person. I love to have diverse viewpoints because I think we make better decisions.

For too long, decisions have been taken behind closed doors - tablets of stone have simply been past down to people without bothering to involve people, listen to their views or give them information about what we are doing and why.

No one questions the right of individuals to go to the Central Lobby to explain their views to their own Member of Parliament. It is important for those in power to hear arguments in favour of policies from all sides and ought to lead to better decision-making.

Taking a vote or poll is a great simple way to take a decision, but it doesn't help a group find consensus. It actually polarizes people and highlights the differences between them. People end up getting entrenched in their views.

I think that a president needs to have a variety of views presented. But also, there has to be a team effort, because otherwise, I think it creates a dissonance and difficulty.

In a way, I have to have a dictatorship. I can't be told that I'm wrong. That conflicts with what I was saying earlier about listening. It isn't to do with receiving criticism and responding to other views, it's who has that last decision.

It feels great to have your own views reflected back to you, and you feel so right, but actually it's very dangerous. Because to make good decisions, you need to have a clear view of what all the options are.

In deciding among theological views, one should be something of a consequentialist: the choice of one theological position over another should be, if not actually determined, at least heavily conditioned by the fact that it implies a better ethical outcome than the alternatives.

My views are politically incorrect. Such as why we allow children to say what they think. It's not how to bring up children. And now people give their children choices, like what they want to eat. Kids can't deal with choices.

If you have a diversity of views at the table, you're much more likely to avoid pitfalls.

I didn't tell my kids, 'You have to play viola, and you have to play piano.' They chose these things on their own, and I don't think we have to give kids every choice, but we do have to give them some choice because that autonomy is crucial for fostering passion.

Just because people are in authority, if it doesn't seem right, don't do it. If it violates your own principles, don't do it.

In 2012, General Dempsey, General Petraeus directed the CIA, Secretary Panetta and Secretary Clinton recommended to the president to robustly arm and train the Syrian moderates. He says no. In 2013, conduct a military strike, same national security team, against the Assad regime because he violated the chemical red line. He says no.

My impression is the Trump administration is in imminent danger of violating the gunfighter's credo, which is 'Do not pick seven fights if you are carrying a six shooter.'

Adults should be intelligent enough to know what they want - if you don't like it, then don't consume it. A rating system for kids and teens is more important. Especially for violent shows.