Decision making

[dysert]

I'd like to start a discussion on how we make decisions. Some people decide based on facts alone. Others decide based on how they feel. Still others decide by weighing the feelings of others higher than their own. I'm sure there are other ways that people decide on something, and for most of us it's probably a mixture of methods.

What is puzzling to me lately is the fact that there are folks who maintain that the way *they* decide is the only "right" way. Is there one right way to decide something? If so, who/what determines what this way is? Or is there one right way per individual?

Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?

 

[quatona]

I'd like to start a discussion on how we make decisions. Some people decide based on facts alone. Others decide based on how they feel. Still others decide by weighing the feelings of others higher than their own. I'm sure there are other ways that people decide on something, and for most of us it's probably a mixture of methods.

What is puzzling to me lately is the fact that there are folks who maintain that the way *they* decide is the only "right" way. Is there one right way to decide something? If so, who/what determines what this way is? Or is there one right way per individual?

Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?

Interesting question!
Now, it seems to me that a lot depends on the sort of decision we are about to make. So maybe an example would be helpful?

Personally, I see no conflict between deciding based on facts and on my feelings about these facts. I wouldn´t even know how to decide on facts alone: the facts are the facts - in order for there to be an implication how to act based upon facts I would need something beyond the mere facts (a goal, a purpose, a desire, an ideal, a value...).

As for the conflict between my and others´ feelings: I´m increasingly getting aware of the fact that they aren´t in conflict, actually. In my own self-interest I am always willing to take the feelings of others into account - provided they actually tell me their feelings. Which almost never happens: What I typically get instead of feelings are demands, statements about "right/wrong", "good/bad", beliefs, judgements, diagnoses, threats etc.

 

[Chesterton]

Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?

Um, maybe.

 

[LittleQin]

In the past I have used a geometric system to solve problems. Now I am working on revisions to make sure it does not go against Gospel.

Why? Power comes from two sources: God and Satan. Not exactly! All power comes from God ~ even the Satan's. I want my power to come directly from the source (not his adversary) when I put my system to use.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

If there is no material evidence (ie of God) than one can only use feelings I suppose, or rationalism and feelings about such and such a natural theological argument. A priori no x will disprove or prove god to be real, therefore gods existence is a matter of faith, and faith is a matter of feeling secure in a belief. I think it works like this for some people: Religion provides benifits x y z.... therefore it is coherent and pragmatic to believe religion is good, and thefore that faith is also good, and therefore I feel scure in its posited truth.

 

[CryOfALion]

I'd like to start a discussion on how we make decisions. Some people decide based on facts alone. Others decide based on how they feel. Still others decide by weighing the feelings of others higher than their own. I'm sure there are other ways that people decide on something, and for most of us it's probably a mixture of methods.

What is puzzling to me lately is the fact that there are folks who maintain that the way *they* decide is the only "right" way. Is there one right way to decide something? If so, who/what determines what this way is? Or is there one right way per individual?

Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?

It should be that way - each person trusting their own over others. There is some culture of people debasing themselves for someone they consider to be better in some way - athleticism, math, science, medicine, politics, history, music, singing, acting, strength, etc.

I think that stems from fear of being alone - not only physically, but academically, psychologically, intellectually, and so on. I respect "crazy people" for their convictions even if they are wrong. Right and wrong doesn't matter because what is right today is wrong today. All of this is fleeting, and it creates fleeting personalities dependent on foundations built in sand.

Decision making for me relies on a lot of things, and "facts" are just one part of it. In fact, facts are very relative. Experience is one of the best decision arbiters in my opinion.

 

[dysert]

If there is no material evidence (ie of God) than one can only use feelings I suppose, or rationalism and feelings about such and such a natural theological argument. A priori no x will disprove or prove god to be real, therefore gods existence is a matter of faith, and faith is a matter of feeling secure in a belief. I think it works like this for some people: Religion provides benifits x y z.... therefore it is coherent and pragmatic to believe religion is good, and thefore that faith is also good, and therefore I feel scure in its posited truth.

This opens up a kettle of fish. Since God's existence can't be objectively proved, how does one decide whether He exists? Seems like you can't go by evidence (since there isn't any). Thoughts?

 

[ThinkForYourself]

I'd like to start a discussion on how we make decisions. Some people decide based on facts alone. Others decide based on how they feel. Still others decide by weighing the feelings of others higher than their own. I'm sure there are other ways that people decide on something, and for most of us it's probably a mixture of methods.

What is puzzling to me lately is the fact that there are folks who maintain that the way *they* decide is the only "right" way. Is there one right way to decide something? If so, who/what determines what this way is? Or is there one right way per individual?

Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?

I think the best method is to gather as much evidence as possible, and make the decision.

If new evidence comes along, and it shows the decision was wrong, then the decision should be changed.

 

[bhsmte]

I'd like to start a discussion on how we make decisions. Some people decide based on facts alone. Others decide based on how they feel. Still others decide by weighing the feelings of others higher than their own. I'm sure there are other ways that people decide on something, and for most of us it's probably a mixture of methods.

What is puzzling to me lately is the fact that there are folks who maintain that the way *they* decide is the only "right" way. Is there one right way to decide something? If so, who/what determines what this way is? Or is there one right way per individual?

Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?

Depends on the sort of decision you are trying to make.

If you are deciding on something scientific, it would be best to have as many confirmed facts as possible to make an informed objective decision.

When it comes to determining whether you want to marry someone and you love them, best to go on your intuition.

Some things are true for an individual (love), but can not be shown to be true or correct for someone else, because you have no hard facts, just emotions.

Other things, do have hard facts to back them up and are equally available for all to see, who desire to see them.

 

[Emmy]

Dear dysert. I say this with love, God alone is the decision maker, we just follow them. God decides and we follow. God has also given us free choice to follow God`s decisions, or to go our own way. God Loves us and God wants Loving sons and daughters. Jesus God-Son, told us in Matthew 22: 35-40:
" The first and great Commandment is: Love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our minds. The second is like it: Love our neighbour as we love ourselves." Jesus also pointed out, " on these two Commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets." God is Love and God wants our love, freely given and NO conditions tagged on. What does God want us to do?
Matthew 7: 7-10: tells us: " ask and you shall receive," then thank God and share all Love and Joy with our neighbour: all we know and all we meet, friends and not friends. God sees our loving efforts, and God approves and blesses us. We keep asking and receiving, then thank God and share all Love and Joy with all around us. We might stumble and forget at times, but then we ask God to forgive us, and carry on loving and caring.
The Bible tells us: " Repent and be Born Again," give up all our selfish wishes and wants. Love is a Christian`s great weapon, and Love is very catching.
Gradually we will change into the men and women which God wants us to become. The Holy Spirit will help and guide us, and Jesus our Saviour will lead us on: JESUS IS THE WAY. Let us follow God`s decision-making, and start
Loving God with all our beings, and loving our neighbour as we love ourselves.
Greetings from Emmy, your sister in Christ.

 

[Davian]

"Is it possible to explain the neuroscience of decision making in 30 seconds? I had a go as one of my contributions to a new book called 30-Second Brain that’s released in the USA today. Here’s what I wrote:

From Plato’s charioteer controlling the horse of passion, to Freud’s instinctual id suppressed by the ego, there’s a long tradition of seeing reason and emotion as being in opposition to one another. Translating this perspective to neuroscience, one might imagine that successful decision making depends on the rational frontal lobes controlling the animalistic instincts arising from emotional brain regions that evolved earlier (including the limbic system, found deeper in the brain). But the truth is quite different—effective decision making is not possible without the motivation and meaning provided by emotional input. Consider Antonio Damasio’s patient, “Elliott.” Previously a successful businessman, Elliott underwent neurosurgery for a tumor and lost a part of his brain—the orbitofrontal cortex—that connects the frontal lobes with the emotions. He became a real life Mr. Spock, devoid of emotion. But rather than this making him perfectly rational, he became paralyzed by every decision in life. Damasio later developed the somatic marker hypothesis to describe how visceral emotion supports our decisions. For instance, he showed in a card game that people’s fingers sweat prior to picking up from a losing pile, even before they recognize at a conscious level that they’ve made a bad choice.

If 30-seconds is too long for you, here’s the message in 3-seconds:

Feelings provide the basis for human reason—brain-damaged patients left devoid of emotion struggle to make the most elementary decisions."

The Neuroscience of Decision Making Explained in 30 Seconds | WIRED

Works for me.

The card game referenced in the article above can be found here:

"Imagine that I asked you to a play a very simple gambling game. In front of you, are four decks of cards–two red and two blue. Each card in those four decks either wins you a sum of money or costs you some money, and your job is to turn over cards from any of the decks, one at a time, in such a way that maximizes your winnings. What you don’t know at the beginning, however, is that the red decks are a minefield. The rewards are high, but when you lose on red, you lose a lot. You can really only win by taking cards from the blue decks, which offer a nice, steady diet of $50 and $100 payoffs. The question is: how long will it take you to figure this out?

...It’s a system in which our brain reaches conclusions without immediately telling us that it’s reaching conclusions."

The Second Mind

 

[dysert]

If 30-seconds is too long for you, here’s the message in 3-seconds:

Feelings provide the basis for human reason—brain-damaged patients left devoid of emotion struggle to make the most elementary decisions."

So are you saying you believe that feelings trump facts/evidence regardless of the decision one is trying to make?

 

[Davian]

So are you saying you believe that feelings trump facts/evidence regardless of the decision one is trying to make?

Trump? No. What are emotions? In the context of these articles, they are decisions being made below the conscious level. Do you consciously decide to flush with embarrassment? Laugh out loud? Cry at a the birth of your child?

I believe that the phenomenal self has a role in affecting decisions, but it may be highly overrated.

Did I consciously decide to believe in Santa? No.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

...

Davian, I've read about the brain making decisions before we realize it. You seem to have done some research, can I please quickly pick your brain?

Considering that the brain has to do a lot of "calculations" before it can reach a conclusion, I don't think it's that surprising that the brain reaches a conclusion before we consciously realize it. Kind of like a computer has the answer in memory before it is displayed on the screen.

What I do find surprising is the "lag" (to use a computer term). Is there an explanation for this?

 

[Davian]

Davian, I've read about the brain making decisions before we realize it. You seem to have done some research, can I please quickly pick your brain?

Considering that the brain has to do a lot of "calculations" before it can reach a conclusion, I don't think it's that surprising that the brain reaches a conclusion before we consciously realize it. Kind of like a computer has the answer in memory before it is displayed on the screen.

What I do find surprising is the "lag" (to use a computer term). Is there an explanation for this?

Limits of processing power.

Go to 17m20s, to see an experiment to measure the "processing speed" of the brain:

Dan Dennett: The illusion of consciousness - YouTube

At 20m55s: "You are not the authority on your own consciousness that you think you are." - Daniel Dennett

 

[juvenissun]

I'd like to start a discussion on how we make decisions. Some people decide based on facts alone. Others decide based on how they feel. Still others decide by weighing the feelings of others higher than their own. I'm sure there are other ways that people decide on something, and for most of us it's probably a mixture of methods.

What is puzzling to me lately is the fact that there are folks who maintain that the way *they* decide is the only "right" way. Is there one right way to decide something? If so, who/what determines what this way is? Or is there one right way per individual?

Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?

IF the person is a Christian, then yes, his decision is the only right way TO HIM. It may not be the right way for others, include other Christians. But to him who made the decision, it does not matter if other agreed with him or not.

 

[Chesterton]

Limits of processing power.

Go to 17m20s, to see an experiment to measure the "processing speed" of the brain:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjbWr3ODbAo

At 20m55s: "You are not the authority on your own consciousness that you think you are." - Daniel Dennett

That wasn't measuring processing power, it was measuring the amount of change of visual detail in a picture. The more subtle the change, the more time it takes you to find it, not process it.

 

[Davian]

That wasn't measuring processing power, it was measuring the amount of change of visual detail in a picture. The more subtle the change, the more time it takes you to find it, not process it.

Find it? Some of the changes were in the middle of the image, changes that can be seen (once you see them) without moving your eyes.

Do you think the brain has no internal latency? Does your visual cortex hand over its interpretation of what your eyes see to your phenomenal self instantaneously? Mine doesn't.

 

[Davian]

Davian, I've read about the brain making decisions before we realize it. You seem to have done some research, can I please quickly pick your brain?

Considering that the brain has to do a lot of "calculations" before it can reach a conclusion, I don't think it's that surprising that the brain reaches a conclusion before we consciously realize it. Kind of like a computer has the answer in memory before it is displayed on the screen.

What I do find surprising is the "lag" (to use a computer term). Is there an explanation for this?

Limits of processing power.

Go to 17m20s, to see an experiment to measure the "processing speed" of the brain:

<video>

At 20m55s: "You are not the authority on your own consciousness that you think you are." - Daniel Dennett

IF the person is a Christian, then yes, his decision is the only right way TO HIM. It may not be the right way for others, include other Christians. But to him who made the decision, it does not matter if other agreed with him or not.

Obviously, the amount of available processing power varies from person to person.

 

[Chesterton]

Find it? Some of the changes were in the middle of the image, changes that can be seen (once you see them) without moving your eyes.

Other things are involved such as color contrast, shapes, content, overall composition. Even if it's nearly centered (and eyes don't automatically look to the center anyway) it can hard to spot a small grey-ish jet engine relative to a large jet, and with a grey-ish colored runway all around it.

Do you think the brain has no internal latency? Does your visual cortex hand over its interpretation of what your eyes see to your phenomenal self instantaneously? Mine doesn't.

Other things are involved such as color contrast, shapes, content, overall composition. I'm not sure our eyes necessarily move immediately to the center anyway if there's something that stands out elsewhere in the picture.