By Dan Gilbert, 2006 ★★★★★ First read: April 2023 ** # PART I - PROSPECTION All brains make predictions about the immediate, local, personal, future. They use past and present to predict what’ll happen next. Unconsciously. Also called nexting. (pg.6)  Surprise (contradictions to our mental models) can wake us from our dogmatic slumbers, realising we were expecting smth other than we got, even when we weren’t aware (we didn’ know) that we were expecting smth. The human animal is the only animal that thinks about the future. “The human brain is an anticipation machine, and “making future” is the most important thing it does.” Sometime between our high chairs and our rocking chairs, we learn about later.  ### How?  How are we able to think about the future, while other animals aren’t? Enter the frontal lobe - a very new, very big piece of the brain that evolved ~2 or 3 million years ago, as opposed to the rest of the brain (first brain appeared 500 million years ago, primates 70 million years ago, protohumans 2 million years ago, then frontal lobe). Most brains for most of the history of brains were stuck in the present. Most brains living today still are. Except humans… Not to think about the future requires that we convince our frontal lobe not to do what it’s designed to do (and like a heart told not to beat, it rejects this suggestion). ### Why?  Why do we think about the future? Why do we keep simulating it in our imaginations? - It provides pleasure. Makes us feel good - daydreaming is about pleasant stuff - we get so much practice imagining good things that we tend to be unrealistically optimistic about our futures, and we overestimate the likelihood good things will happen - It prevents pain. We imagine bad stuff in the form of worry, bc 1. Anticipating unpleasant events minimises their impact (study pg.20) and 2. Fear and worry have useful roles in motivating us. - Makes us feel in control, we like being in control so much . Our brains want to control the experiences we are about to have. Being captains of our own ship. Why?  - The right answer - Bc ppl find it gratifying to exercise control, for the exercise itself. The fact that we can steer the ship is rewarding. Impact is rewarding. - The wrong answer - Bc of the actual output of the exercise of control. The fact that we can make the ship arrive at a destination port of our choosing. We experience illusions of eyesight, illusions of hindsight and illusions of foresight - explained by the same basic principles of human psychology. # PART II - SUBJECTIVITY ### Idea 1. There are three types of happiness -  1. Emotional happiness - the “you-know-what-I-mean”, subjective experience, feeling 2. Moral happiness - the ancient greek “eudaimonia”, life of virtue, the morality of things, the morality of the actions that induce the subjective experience 3. Judgemental happiness - “happy that”, “happy about”, the merits of things, the merits of the subjective experience ### Idea 2. We usually mean emotional happiness -   1. Can we compare my happiness to your happiness along the same scale? 2. Can we compare my current happiness to my previous happiness along the same scale?  3. Can we compare two of our own different kinds of happiness on the same scale? (does eating cake feel different from helping a friend) Answers: - We’ll never really have a way to know how others feel. “Is my red your red” etc. - Our report of how happy we feel (in general or abt smth in particular) is entirely dependent on our experiential background - pg.54 - the “language squishing hypothesis” vs the “experience stretching hypothesis” - a kid rates receiving a birthday cake at 10/10 while you rate it at 5/10  - is the kid’s experience of 10 at your experience of 5 or at your experience of 10?  - language squishing claims it’s at your 5 → NO - experience stretching claims it’s at your 10. → YES  - Conclusion: kids rating the cake at 10/10 really do feel just as subjectively happy as you do when you experience smth else that you’d rate at a 10. It’s precisely because “they don’t know what they’re missing”, that they’re happy at a 10. - Comparing current and past experiences in terms of happiness level is very hard. We rely on memory to compare the happiness from now to the happiness from the past, and memory is tricky, it all depends where we focus our attention when we have an experience. (pg.49) Quotes: “Once we have an experience, we can never again set it aside and see the world as if we had not had the experience. The experience instantly becomes part of the lens through which we view our past, present and future. Once we learn to read, we can never again see letters as mere inky squiggles.” (pg.) ### Idea 3. How do we measure a subjective experience such as emotional happiness? It’s hard to measure, but not impossible. I. Evolution has made our brains to survive, not to understand: 1. Brains evolved the important parts first (ex: the part that controls your breathing) and the less important parts later (the part that controls your temper) 2. Brains evolved to decide first if an object matters (aka is it scary) and understand later what it is; this is possible bc there’s enough information in the very early, very general stages of object identification to decide if it’s scary but not enough to evaluate what it is. -- Later Note from neuroscience study - 2 paths from sensory input to amygdala, one of which bypasses the visual cortex so that you actually react before you consciously see the snake  3. The conclusion is that our brains put our bodies in a certain state (of alertness, of arousal) before we understand why → this affects our ability to identify our own emotions. II. There is a fundamental difference between experience and awareness 1. Experience implies participation in an event, gives us the sense of being engaged 2. Awareness implies observation of an event, gives us the sense of being cognizant of the engagement (an experience of the experience) 3. The conclusion is that the disassociation bw experience and awareness → affects our ability to identify our own emotions. We can have emotions/feelings and not know we do, or not be able to describe them. (extreme cases - numbfeel, alexithymia) III. If a thing can not be measured, then it cannot be studied scientifically. We need to accept three premises so that we can begin measurement on subjective experience of happiness: 1. Imperfect tools are better than no tools 2. The least imperfect tool is the honest, real time report of the attentive individual (pg.72) 3. Imperfections in tools are only dangerous when unknown - we know the flaws inherent in reports of subjective experience and we can correct for them through the law of large numbers (pg.74) (1k reports level out single reports - ) Feelings don’t just matter - they are what mattering means. “Are any of these things good for any other reason other than they end in pleasure and get rid of and avert pain?”  (Plato) # PART III - REALISM ### Shortcomings of memory → seeing the past - we don’t store “everything” in memory, only a compressed version of events made up of critical aspects - when we remember, we actually rebuild not retrieve - we fabricate the whole starting from the few critical aspects that were stored, and we fill-in the gaps - very important: information acquired after an event alters the memory of the event - conclusions: 1. remembering requires filling-in details that were not stored 2. these details can be wrong, based on info we learned after the event, and also based on the “gist” of the few aspects stored 3. we are not aware of doing this, it happens quickly and unconsciously 4. we are very confident that we got it right - we “ vividly remember it” 5. we are still doing it even if we are warned smn will trick us into falsely remembering smth we had not seen/experienced (pg. 90) ### Shortcomings of perception → seeing the present The literal visual blind spot -  - the eyeball can not register an image at the point at which the optic nerve attaches, there are no visual receptors there - the brain actively fills-in the image based on what it sees around it (see the magician trick at pg. 91) Filling-in auditory information as well → the experiemtns with the cough etc., we can not help “hearing” the missing word, letter etc even when we know it’s not there Realism - thinking that what is in the mind is in the world  A two-year old who knows that a cookie was placed in the jar in the cupboard expects everyone to know this. Without a distinction bw things in the mind and things in the world, the child can not understand how different minds can contain different things.  Idealism - realising that perceptions are merely points of view, that two ppl may have different perceptions of, or beliefs about, the same thing. BUT, it turns out that  - we are wired to be realists - we automatically assume that our subjective experience of a thing is a faithful representation of the thing’s properties.  - this tendency to equate our subjective sense of things with the objective properties of those things remains spontaneous and immediate throughout our lives We do not realise that we are at all times seeing an interpretation, not a faithful representation of ourselves in the world.  The problem is not that we are faking our past, present and future, but that we are not AWARE that we do. We believe these fabrications are accurate representations. Why is that a problem? Bc we then act accordingly, we take decisions, we plan, we judge, we evaluate etc. ### Shortcomings of imagination → seeing the future - when asked to imagine smth vague and how much they’d enjoy it (spaghetti), we fill-in the details (without realising) and estimate our enjoyment of it accordingly - the details that the brain automatically and unconsciously fills-in are crucial to an accurate prediction of your response to the imagined event - When we imagine the future we often do so in the blind spot of our mind’s eye - Pg.101 - See also the chapter on [PRESENTISM](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CKzIWx0oPUj6k4v65xEKL9o7nHTqQ1xGsZFQF4I0CUg/edit#heading=h.4czomzswlgac) for more shortcomings ### Considering what is not, the absence of smth 1. We’re unable to think about absences usually - When we are selecting, we consider the positive attributes of our alternatives, when we are rejecting we’re considering the negative attributes 2. We can not imagine everything (in detail) of a future scenario. We fail to consider how much imagination fills-in (see previous point) but we also fail to consider how much it leaves out 3. We imagine events in the very near future in a lot of detail and events in the far future in very general terms 4. We tend to think about very distant events (past or future) in very abstract terms - the why of it (causes & consequences), whereas for near events we think in terms of how (execution) pg.116 5. What’s really interesting - we act as if the distant event really is blurry and smooth and detail-free and then are horrified when we see it isn’t, unlike with visual perception (we’re not horrified to see that the field of corn is not really a solid smooth yellow square) Ex: Babysitting next month is an act of love whereas babysitting today is an act of lunch. ### End of Part III Perception, imagination and memory are remarkable abilities that have a good deal in common, but in at least one way perception is the wisest of the triplets. Any brain that does the filling-in trick is bound to do the leaving-out trick as well, and thus the futures we imagine contain some details that our brains made up and lack some details that our brains ignored. The problem is not that they do this. The problem is they do it so well that we aren’t aware it is happening. # PART IV PRESENTISM When brains plug holes in the conceptualisation of the past and the future, the material they use to do that is the present (pg.125 for all the examples) ### Presentism in the past - The past is like a wall with holes - Memory uses the filling-in trick - Using the present to reconstruct the past is especially powerful when we remember emotions - We tend to remember that we always felt like we currently feel ### Presentism in the future - The future is like a hole with no walls - Imagination is the filling-in trick - We usually grossly underestimate the novelty of the future & predict that the future will be too much like the present. It’s very hard to believe that we will ever think, want or feel very differently than we do now ### Causes for presentism 1. Imagination and perception use the same brain areas. Perception always has priority 2. We reason about time, an abstract concept, approximating it to space  3. Imagining future objects, events and feelings is done with the same brain parts used in sensory perception and emotion  - Can’t imagine being hungry when we’re full, and vice-versa. Forecasting our hungers - gustatory, sexual, emotional, social, intellectual (p..129) is almost impossible - One example: volunteers took a boring 5-question geography quiz and were made to choose one of two rewards: a chocolate bar or the answers to the quiz. Half were asked to choose before taking the quiz, half after. The before ones chose the chocolate, the after ones chose the answers. A new group were asked to predict what they would choose before & after and they predicted that they’ll choose the chocolate in both cases. - Why are the powers of human imagination so easily humbled? Why can we imagine life on a banana plantation and inside a submarine, being painted purple and rolled in almonds, but we can not imagine being hungry when we’re full? ### How does imagination work? - Imagination previews objects - the brain uses the visual and auditory cortex to imagine visual and auditory objects - The region of the brain normally activated when we see objects with our eyes (the visual cortex) is the same one activated when we “imagine” objects with our “mind’s eye”. The same is true for other senses. The auditory cortex is activated when we are asked to say which note is highest in “Happy Birthday” etc. - The brain uses the sensory areas when it wants to imagine the sensible features of the world - we send info about the object from our memory to our visual or auditory cortex and produce a fake look or a fake listen - Imagination prefeels events - the brain uses the same areas that generate emotions in the present to generate emotional reactions to a simulation of a potential future emotional event  - The areas of the brain that respond emotionally to real events are the same area that respond emotionally to imaginary events ### Prefeeling - Allows us to predict emotions better than logical thinking (when ppl are prevented from feeling emotion in the present, they become temporarily unable to predict emotions in the future pt.134) - When the brain areas are used for one, they aren’t available for the other - when we ask our brain to look at a real object and an imaginary object at the same time, it will always choose the real one.  - The brain considers the perception of reality to be its first and foremost duty, thus your request to borrow the cortex for a quick act of imagination will be denied - This is why we can’t imagine penguins while looking at ostriches, green while looking at red, hunger while full, lust while disgusted, affection while angry - Future events may request access to the emotional areas of our brain, but current events will get priority ### Reality First policy - The problem with this is that we understand and accept this policy for the sensory system but not for the emotional system - If whilst in the mid of an awful day you’re asked to imagine how much you’d enjoy going out with your friends the next evening, you’re likely to attribute feelings you feel right now towards your pets/kids to feelings you will feel tomorrow for your friends - Depression works like this - we can’t feel good about an imaginary future when we are busy feeling bad about an actual present. When depressed, you feel very bad today so you can not imagine feeling happy tomorrow, bc you can not feel happy now. But instead of realising this is the First Policy being enforced, you mistakenly believe you accurately imagine feeling bad tomorrow. Even knowing how this works and trying your best to set aside ignore, overlook the present, we can’t many times.  Pg. 138 Conclusion: We think we are thinking outside of the box only because we can’t see how big the box really is. Imagination cannot easily transcend the boundaries of the present (time, space and circumstance) and one reason for this is that it must borrow machinery that is owned by perception. 2. We either think about time as if it were another space dimension, or not think about it at all, as we imagine the future. We can imagine concrete things, we can not imagine abstract things. We do not have mental images of abstract things. When we need to reason about an abstract concept, we think about a concrete one that the abstract thing is “like” and then reason about that one instead.  When we think about time, we consider it like a spatial dimension, it helps us think about it, but it’s also misleading us. Habituation can be combated by two things: - Time - increase the amount of time between repetitions of same experience - Variety - increase the variety of one’s experiences - One doesn’t need the other. - In fact when experiences are spread out in time, variety is not only necessary but costly. Why would you ask for variety when you already have time? Blame the space metaphor. We think of dishes as being laid out in space on a table in front of us, instead of in time, spread out by 4 weeks.  Mental images are atemporal. We imagine “who”, “what” and “where” but not “when”. Ex:  - imagine finding your wife in bed with the mailman on Christmas/Easter/Halloween etc - imagine a Budweiser babe would visit you with a 6-pack right now / in 50 years → we begin by imagining the event as though it were happening now, then correct and project in the future.  The Flip then Flop method’s problem is that starting points have a profound effect on ending points because we often end up close to where we started. When we naturally use our present feelings as a starting point when we try to predict our future feelings, we expect our future to feel a bit more like our present than it actually will. 3. ### Comparing with the Past - Brains aren’t sensitive to the absolute magnitude of stimulation but is extraordinarily sensitive to changes - that is, to the relative magnitude of stimulation - Brains don’t detect grams, they detect differences and changes in grams, and any other physical property of an object - We choose an expensive thing bc we were primed by seeing it next to an even more expensive one - 4 56We don’t bother for a 50 USD discount on a 50,000 USD car but bother for a 50 USD discount on a 100 USD coffee machine.  (when you spend the 50 dollars on gas or groceries, they won’t know where they came from) - The subjective value of a commodity is relative  Because it's much easier for me to remember the past than to generate new possibilities, I will tend to compare the present with the past even when I ought to be comparing it to the possible.  Ex. A cup of coffee gets more expensive one morning, instead of comparing the new lrice to all other possible ways in which I could spend that money, I compare it with the former price and conckjde it's "too damned expensive." → we treat commodities that have a "memorable past" differently than those that don't  Ex. You have a 20 eur note and a 20 eur concert ticket in yiur wallet, as yku go to the concert. When you arrive, you see you lost the ticket. Would you buy a new one? Most ppl wouldn't. Imagine you had two 20 eur notes instead and lost one. Would you buy a ticket now? Most ppl say yes.  In the first case, the concert has a "past", so we compare the current cost to see it of 40, with the previous coat of 20. In the second case, it has no past, so we compare the cost to see it of 20 with any other possible thing we could spend it on.  4. ### Comparing with the Possible  - harder than with the past, which is why retailers make it very easy for us - when comparing with the possible we decide how to spend, rather than whether to spend  - retailers help us overcome our natural tendency to compare with the past by showing us side-by-side possibilities  Side by side comparisons: - we don't like buying the most expensive, so we see a very expensive option that nobody buys to make us buy the expensive one - “the decoy” - we get confused and paralysed by the addition of extra possibilities that match, are identical to the one we are considering, so we end up giving up all together  - lead us to consider any and all attributes that helps distinguish bw the possibilities - even those I don't care about  ### Comparing and Presentism Why does all this matter when we imagine future feelings  - value is relative, not absolute (dollars are absolute)  - value is determined by the comparison of one thing with another  - there is more than one kind of comparison we can make at any given time - ar trebui cand revizui la editare sa listez toate felurile  - we may attribute more value to smth when we make one kind of comparison than when we make another  So, when we want to predict how smth will make us feel in the future, we must consider the kind of comparison we will make in the future, not the one we make in the present.  Ex: In the present, we compare the small elegant speakers to the huge bulky ones in the store, and buy the huge ones bc of a difference in sound quality that we will not notice in the future, at home.  We make different comparisons at different times, and in differemt ways, but we don't realise that we do.  Ex. Why does a buyer and a seller disagree about the value of a car? one expects a gain (smaller impact) the other a loss (bigger impact)  - losing a dollar has more impact than gaining a dollar  - ppl expect this BUT - considering smth a loss or a gain oftentimes depends on the comparisons we make  - our frames of reference shift once we make the sale  The comparisons we make have a profound impact on our feelings.  # PART V RATIONALISATION **