Warren Harding Error

Malcolm Gladwell in this book of account proposes that people have the ability to unconsciously think without consciously thought. That we could total at ratiocinations, resolutions, and judgments without mentation too more and it is likely to be as good as when we consciously think deeply. Gladwell defines thin-slicing as that ability of our unconscious to find patterns in situations and behavior based on very constringe slices of experience. He tells us that we have a crucial brain operation that keeps us able to function by silently motioning cursory stimulus called our reconciling unconscious.An individual is unaw atomic number 18 of such brain process thus making it to a great extent uncontrollable. He gave a good example called the Warren Harding Error which is thin-slicing in a sciolistic level and giving too much emphasis on the kidnap judgment. The author utilize a combination of scientific studies (Implicit Association Test), historical accounts (Warren Hard ing), social happenings (discrimination), notable trends (Coke v Pepsi), and simple day to day observations regarding the excogitation of snap-judgments called thin-slicing.The book opens our eyes to the fact that in coming up with judgments and decisions, we are not al ports value-neutral. That in coming up with these judgment and decisions regarding erect about anything on that point is the factor of time and careful investigation. The author used evidences that strengthen the theory that we thus rely on our own adaptive unconscious and that we are capable at arriving on a decision that is accurate. An example would be the how the fake kouros was identified from a mere hunch. He points out also there is an also likely chance that our way of thinking would be impaired by day to day fountain of stimulus.An example would be the Warren Harding Error which lets us stop from thinking beyond what we already figured. It keeps us away from weighing the exact to olfactory property be yond what we thin-slice. It is important for us not to rely too much on our snap judgment and we should know when to apply such judgments. of import moments and decision making in such moments still require thinking twice and doubting and thin-slicing must then give way to intelligent thinking and decision making. Along this line, the author also wishes for us to toy with that stereotyping is also a tool for thin-slicing.It is then important for us to consciously be able to look beyond our stereotyped ideas. While it may be unconsciously done, our knowledge of our disposition would bring it out in the conscious level. Finally, it should also be noted that at times there is a need for the isolation of our criteria for judgment. The unconscious is able to seep with the creation of the judgment although it is not in line with the true personality of our decision (you may hate President Bush not because of his policies on war but because of his southern drawl).In this situations t here is a need to revolve around on what rightfully should be considered. The book is applicable in nigh all facets of life. Even in law, the theories pushed by the author finds application . Although not apparent, its application to the legal system tells us that Law is governed by humankind features (i. e. flaws and strengths). Think about how often we thin slice, judges or juries are also able to thin-slice without them knowing it.It is value neutral yet it neer takes away the fact that it could work for or against anyone thus reasonability and equality really does not exist. What is crucial at this point is that we accept that people indeed thin-slice and that we really are able to come up with a speech sound judgment regardless of the length of time that we think and whoever we are. We may never realize this but we thin-slice every day, we thin slice people at the first moment we meet them, we thin slice every day, we stereotype, and we need to realize this.