TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Thinking About Thinking (1999)

553 点作者 handojin超过 6 年前

16 条评论

wingspar超过 6 年前
A pdf version <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cia.gov&#x2F;library&#x2F;center-for-the-study-of-intelligence&#x2F;csi-publications&#x2F;books-and-monographs&#x2F;psychology-of-intelligence-analysis&#x2F;PsychofIntelNew.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cia.gov&#x2F;library&#x2F;center-for-the-study-of-intellig...</a>
评论 #18512239 未加载
chiefalchemist超过 6 年前
&gt; &quot;The reaction of the Intelligence Community to many problems is to collect more information, even though analysts in many cases already have more information than they can digest. What analysts need is more truly useful information--mostly reliable HUMINT from knowledgeable insiders--to help them make good decisions. Or they need a more accurate mental model and better analytical tools to help them sort through, make sense of, and get the most out of the available ambiguous and conflicting information.&quot;<p>I would think the key is the latter. That is, even if you get more data it does not become __useful__ information unless you&#x27;re willing and able to process it.<p>That aside, it&#x27;s difficult, if not impossible for us &quot;on the outside&quot; to judge the value of these concept to the IC as we only get to know what the IC wants us to know. They&#x27;re playing the long game. They&#x27;re playing chess. Maybe it&#x27;s just me but when I hear a news story (or a friend &#x2F; colleague) that says &quot;The NSA said...&quot; or the &quot;CIA said...&quot; I accept those as close to meaningless. The IC is, afterall, in the misinformation business.<p>p.s. I believe the proper term for tbinking about thinking is meta-cognition. I find it odd that the CIA would avoid using the proper term.
评论 #18507351 未加载
评论 #18508091 未加载
评论 #18507388 未加载
评论 #18508142 未加载
评论 #18508448 未加载
评论 #18509194 未加载
评论 #18509498 未加载
abalone超过 6 年前
Here&#x27;s a fun image. I totally fell for it the first time.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cia.gov&#x2F;library&#x2F;center-for-the-study-of-intelligence&#x2F;csi-publications&#x2F;books-and-monographs&#x2F;psychology-of-intelligence-analysis&#x2F;fig1.gif&#x2F;image.gif" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cia.gov&#x2F;library&#x2F;center-for-the-study-of-intellig...</a>
评论 #18508565 未加载
评论 #18507462 未加载
hx2a超过 6 年前
This book is a classic. I&#x27;ve read the whole thing several times and found it to be thought provoking and helpful. The author gives you tools for &quot;explicit cognitive processes&quot; to aid analysis of complex situations.
评论 #18508060 未加载
OliverJones超过 6 年前
I read this a couple of days after watching Doug Limman&#x27;s movie &quot;Fair Game.&quot; (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.imdb.com&#x2F;title&#x2F;tt0977855&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.imdb.com&#x2F;title&#x2F;tt0977855&#x2F;</a>) Liman is known for playing the amoral chief of staff in House of Cards.<p>This CIA training book is all about avoiding self-deception and getting as close as possible to the truth. Those are good aspirations for any trade. Try debugging a complex system without doing those things. You can&#x27;t.<p>But there&#x27;s a whole lot more to making the truth useful. People with power must also avoid self-deception: they must listen. That didn&#x27;t happen back in 2002-2003.<p>The movie is about Bush 43 and Cheney&#x27;s push to convince the world about nuclear weapons in Iraq. That administration infamously disclosed the identity of a CIA undercover person called Valerie Plame. They did so to discredit her spouse Ambassador Joe Wilson.<p>Mr. Wilson made a fact-finding trip to the nation of Niger (north of Nigeria) to verify the administration&#x27;s claim that Niger&#x27;s uranium mines sold vast quantities of yellowcake uranium oxide to Iraq. Mr. Wilson&#x27;s investigation proved that claim was false. Therefore, he needed to be discredited. Therefore the White House outed his spouse, wrecking her career and losing the lives of her contacts in various places.<p>CIA people come off as the good guys--earnest purveyors of truth--both in the movie and this training book. But even they can&#x27;t prevent the kind of collective self-delusion that comes when politicians&#x27; minds are made up.<p>How many of us hackers embark on projects we know are doomed to failure? How many of us know how to validate our hunches with the right amount of information? Many of us, because that&#x27;s the easy part. How many of us know how to convince people above us in the food chain? Far fewer. That&#x27;s a place where training might come in handy.
评论 #18510216 未加载
alexandercrohde超过 6 年前
I read one chapter of this, and it seems like a reasonable ambition. However I have to ask -- Do they do <i>any</i> research at all on whether teaching these methods actually results in greater thinking by any objective measure (be it IQ, analysis, whatever)?<p>This must be the standard to be taken seriously. Anybody can wax on about how to avoid systemic biases, but it&#x27;s my understanding that the research shows studying biases doesn&#x27;t remove them.
评论 #18507344 未加载
评论 #18507213 未加载
Inu超过 6 年前
So the author joined the CIA in 1951 and &quot;spent the next 24 years working with the Directorate of Operations.&quot; [1] That means that he probably participated in some of the disastrous covert operations of that era. [2] I don&#x27;t know if that makes him a trustworthy authority on intelligence analysis.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Richards_Heuer" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Richards_Heuer</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;United_States_involvement_in_regime_change#1950s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;United_States_involvement_in_r...</a>
评论 #18507142 未加载
评论 #18507568 未加载
评论 #18507190 未加载
评论 #18511961 未加载
评论 #18512768 未加载
评论 #18507692 未加载
评论 #18507152 未加载
mythrwy超过 6 年前
Thinking analytically is skill that can be taught, certainly, but it&#x27;s turtles all the way down.<p>Which is to say is, one part of consciousnesses can take control of another part through training, yes. But who is it that is taking control? Until we self-determine this (or accept some form of math as an arbitrator of reality where applicable) one bias or conditioning is simply replaced with another. Can&#x27;t get the most accurate models like that.
nj65537超过 6 年前
The style of writing makes this read like a sledgehammer. It is strangely refreshing.
评论 #18507130 未加载
评论 #18507207 未加载
norswap超过 6 年前
I&#x27;m surprised to find no mention of Rationality: From AI to Zombie (alternatively known as The LessWrong Sequences), which seems to treat the same subject matter: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;intelligence.org&#x2F;rationality-ai-zombies&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;intelligence.org&#x2F;rationality-ai-zombies&#x2F;</a>
bhhaskin超过 6 年前
Kinda random, but it is interesting how they are including a public key in a javascript file.
评论 #18507404 未加载
dang超过 6 年前
Previous discussion of the book this is from: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=14852250" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=14852250</a>
paraschopra超过 6 年前
I recently made a Google Spreadsheet to help think better. Designed it from the perspective of helping original thinking while reducing confirmation and availability bias. Check it out <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.google.com&#x2F;spreadsheets&#x2F;d&#x2F;1b9Kjw9pW5cDwGJaJl5614NMPIxB_sjflderZzC7rB1w&#x2F;htmlview#gid=1447928622" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.google.com&#x2F;spreadsheets&#x2F;d&#x2F;1b9Kjw9pW5cDwGJaJl561...</a><p>Feedback appreciated!
评论 #18509307 未加载
评论 #18509845 未加载
carapace超过 6 年前
&gt; A basic finding of cognitive psychology is that people have no conscious experience of most of what happens in the human mind. Many functions associated with perception, memory, and information processing are conducted prior to and independently of any conscious direction. What appears spontaneously in consciousness is the result of thinking, not the process of thinking.<p>So... who is it that has (or doesn&#x27;t have) free will?
评论 #18511055 未加载
grendelt超过 6 年前
Metacognition - think about it.
taspeotis超过 6 年前
I&#x27;m surprised that the word &quot;metacognition&quot; [1] doesn&#x27;t appear in this article at all.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Metacognition" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Metacognition</a>
评论 #18507329 未加载
评论 #18507460 未加载