

Part II: The glass isn’t half-empty or half-full. It's just complex or simple
In the previous article, I presented the problem of gut instincts and personal preferences in decision-making and argued that we need a more scientific model of the basis for risk-taking and risk-aversion in decision-making. In this final part of the article I will explain how we can begin to construct a theory of rational risk-aversion and risk-taking based on the children’s game 20 Questions. 20 Questions, A Recap In one version of game ‘20 Questions’, which I used to play


The glass isn’t half-empty or half-full. It's just complex or simple
Using gut instincts Are you a glass half-empty or half-full kind of person? The question paints optimism and pessimism as a personality trait. Whether, or not, we seem to be pessimists or optimists, risk takers, or risk-averse for that matter, the question reflects something interesting about how we characterise each other’s decisions and decision-making. In today’s world, we still, as a society, take a lot of decisions based on ‘gut instinct’. Although we often have data and


Ways to be Rationally Complex
Predictability in nature allows complex solutions Surprisingly large parts of our world are simple in the sense that nature’s predictability allows us to design complex systems on top of this ‘simplicity’. As I’ve mentioned in another blog post, ‘Complexity 101’, which is a gentle introduction, scientists using only chalk and blackboard were able to discover the theory of evolution in biology and most of the laws of physics, including gravity, relativity and even quantum mech