Recently I have recommended two books, Coincidences, Chaos, and all That Math Jazz and Freakonomics. Both books are aimed at a general audience, but have some really important concepts to discuss. One of the most important is that a person doesn’t have to be fluent in higher mathematics to correctly assess the relative risks and take the correct actions.
Making decisions is important on every level of society. Individuals must decide a host of things every day; for instance, which forms of transportation are best for them. Given the high price of gasoline, should we buy a hybrid? Are we concerned only about cost? If everyone minimizes their personal cost, does the environment suffer or benefit? Cities and towns must allocate scarce resources on emergency preparation, road repair, public health, education, and infrastructure tasks such a sewage treatment. States have broader tasks, and countries have the difficulty of deciding how to interact with other countries. If we bomb a country into submission and occupy it with the best intentions of helping the citizens to lead a better life, will they be grateful and cooperative? Note, that I am only asking a simple “If A happens, then does B occur?” question. Addressing the policy of whether to invade in the first place would take me from decision making to politics. So I avoid that, but asking sensitive questions is not the same as stating a belief. Asking sensitive questions is the first step in seeking answers. For some reason, many people assume that by asking a sensitive question, then questioner is expressing a contrary point of view. I don’t understand that mindset.
Decision theory and risk analysis are useful tools that can help people of any political (or religious) persuasion avoid making mistakes. They are particularly useful in helping to make the right decision in exactly the sensitive areas that some people wish to avoid questioning.
The two books I recommend cover three aspects of decision theory: (1) anyone can apply simple analysis, (2) better decisions result from unbiased consideration of risks, and (3) the process can be fun. (Both books intersperse serious discussions with fun things.)
Since those topics have been covered so well, let’s consider some issues that are not covered by either book. For instance, I just claimed two paragraphs up that using decision theory analysis can help a person avoid making mistakes, but what is a mistake? Would buying a hybrid automobile be a mistake if dispassionate analysis shows that the total cost of owning and operating it is greater than the costs of a similar standard automobile? Yes, it would be a mistake if the only consideration is the economic tradeoff and if the projected operating costs are reliable. No, it would not be a mistake if the buyer gets a feeling of satisfaction in burning less gasoline than would be possible with standard technology. That is, what constitutes a mistake depends on the values an individual (or country) holds dear.
To a large extent, values precede and are independent of analysis. One has to start somewhere, and as long as your accepted values are mutually consistent and make accurate predictions about the real world, then I have no quarrel with you. If your values are such that you believe our personalities survive physical death in a way that is not physically detectable, then so be it. However, if you also say that dead people can communicate with us in the real world, I am free to subject your values to experimental testing and critical analysis with the result being a probability that you are correct. Keeping a self-consistent set of values and using care is making decisions are probably the most important things we can do to improve out lives, and the nice thing is that doing it correctly can be fun.
In response to the interest my original tutorial generated, I have completely rewritten and expanded it. Check out the tutorial availability through Lockergnome. The new version is over 100 pages long with chapters that alternate between discussion of the theoretical aspects and puzzles just for the fun of it. Puzzle lovers will be glad to know that I included an answers section that includes discussions as to why the answer is correct and how it was obtained. Most of the material has appeared in these columns, but some is new. Most of the discussions are expanded compared to what they were in the original column format.
[tags]decision theory,freakonomics,coincidences chaos and all that math jazz,risk analysis,weighing values[/tags]