Decision-making, as we know from experience, is necessary, responsible, and sometimes painful. Renowned neuroscientist Jonah Lehrer told us about whether you can finally learn how to choose toothpaste, work or partner in the best way.
Psychologies: Your book How We Make Decisions has become a worldwide bestseller. Why did you want to write about it?
John Lehrer: When I went to the supermarket, I could spend half an hour, for example, trying to decide on the type of breakfast cereal! And then for another half an hour I thought about what kind of toothpaste to take … In general, at some point it became simply impossible to endure, and working on the book helped me a lot. After writing it, I learned to make many decisions faster. Because I knew for sure: the extra time spent on making a decision does not at all guarantee that it will be successful. There is no direct relationship here. As there is, for example, no direct relationship between the amount of information we have and the quality of our decision. Sometimes additional knowledge about the situation only hurts, making it difficult for us to choose…
Have you managed to find a single algorithm for making the right decisions?
D. L .: Unfortunately no. The human brain is still insufficiently studied and mysterious. And the science of the brain is still too young, and not only does it not have ready-made answers, it is still far from always capable of even asking precise questions. Therefore, if someone claims: “I know exactly how to always make the right decisions, listen to me — and you will succeed” — do not believe this person. He is simply lying. We can only outline the most general principles, following which you can get closer to the desired goal.
For example, following intuition?
D. L .: The ability of our intellect to instantly find answers and solutions outside of predictable logic really helps us out sometimes. But trusting intuition is not always worth it. For example, you need to make a decision, that is, make a choice. You have been in a similar situation before and experienced something similar. If you have enough time, you will most likely remember this, remember your actions at that moment and their result. But sometimes there is not enough time, you need to act quickly. And this is where intuition comes in. Memory has not yet managed to find the necessary events, causes and effects, but your emotional memory has already compared them. And if your previous choice was successful, then the inner voice (in the hope of a new portion of positive emotions) shouts: “Come on, go ahead!” And if it ends badly, fear kicks in, and the same voice protests: “Don’t do this under any circumstances!” Approximately so, from the point of view of modern science, intuition works. When we find ourselves in a completely new situation for ourselves, then no inner voice will help us. We just never experienced emotions that could be useful to remember. And even if intuition is trying to say something, you don’t need to listen to it: you will have to act, relying on logic and common sense.
So how do the best solutions come about?
D. L .: Thanks to the interaction of logic and intuition, two types of thinking. And in order to tune the work of the brain in this way, you need to learn how to think about how we think. Not a single animal on the planet thinks about this process, does not try to figure out what is going on in his head — only man! And it is a pity that we do this much less often than we could. We make decisions spontaneously, or we are guided only by emotions, or … But you never know how else — just without thinking about how they should be taken. But this is a great and unique gift, and we simply have no right not to use it to the full!
How can we be aware of what is going on in our minds?
D. L .: Practice is the main key! You have to constantly practice. Of course, it is much easier to make a minimum of effort, to think without thinking, to make decisions without bothering to understand how we do it. But if we really want to achieve something, we are inevitably forced to work harder. It happens everywhere: to become a good athlete, you need to train more, to excel in science — to devote more time to research and acquaintance with the work of your colleagues. And it’s the same with decision making. More labor will have to be done. We’ll have to think about how we do it. And when this becomes a constant practice, a habit, we will certainly be able to make much better decisions. It is only necessary to understand that we are all different and the brain of each person has individual characteristics. For some, this skill can be given a lot of effort, and for others less, but I am sure that everyone is capable of succeeding. Meditation is a good example: in a sense, it is also the practice of understanding how we think — and the ability to get rid of unnecessary thoughts. The technique of meditation is also not mastered immediately. But everyone can do it.
Will we ever understand how our brain works? Will we learn everything about the mechanisms of thinking?
D. L .: To be honest, I’m not sure about this. The brain and thought processes are perhaps the biggest mystery in the universe. It can be said that in some aspects we have come closer to understanding it, but in others we have encountered an even greater mystery. And we still do not understand how we think — how we do it.
Similar things are happening in other areas of science. After all, physicists a few decades ago were almost sure that they were about to understand absolutely everything about the structure of our world …
ONLY WE HUMANS ARE ABLE TO THINK ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON IN OUR HEAD. It’s a pity that we do this less often than we could!
D. L .: Exactly! And what do we have today? String theory, conjectures about the multiplicity of universes and hypotheses about the existence of at least 11 dimensions! A non-specialist is generally unable to understand what today’s theoretical physics thinks about the structure of the world. But one can suspect that this science is more confused than ever before. But this happens in parallel with the accumulation of new knowledge. Their volume is growing, but understanding is not yet increasing. And neuroscience, it seems to me, is doing exactly the same thing.
You speak as if you do not fully believe in the knowability of the world. How can one be a popularizer of science with such views?
D. L .: Perhaps, I really can be called an agnostic. In the sense that I believe in the infinity of the Universe, and therefore in the infinity of the process of its cognition … I am not ready to talk about God, about miracles and holiness, this is too big and complicated a topic. But it seems to me that people tend to place God where their own knowledge is lacking, where they are faced with a riddle they cannot solve. And in a sense, the mystery of our consciousness and thinking can also be God. God may not be outside, but inside of us.
So, by revealing this secret, we will be able to know God?
D. L .: No, it will just move somewhere else.
And you call yourself an optimist?
This of course depends on the day of the week! But seriously, I am an optimist when it comes to science: I believe that it can make people and their lives better.