Review: Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don't Have All the Facts

Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don't Have All the Facts by Annie Duke
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

For the most part, Thinking in Bets is a really strong book about decision-making in uncertain conditions, cognitive biases that lead to misattributions, and shortcomings in our mental frameworks for belief-formation. The analysis is interesting, drawing from psychology and philosophy as well as anecdotal evidence from Duke's poker career as well as more popular events. It is relatively engaging if a little bit epidermal.

While the book does identify problems with decision-making and belief-formation compellingly, it is somewhat weak when it comes to providing strong solutions. While some of the solutions are interesting, some are underdeveloped. Its core thesis, that we must learn to think in bets, is interesting at first but soon the book starts to over-generate. It tries to shoehorn this idea to try and solve everything from self-serving biases to regret.

The book is at its worst when it tries to shoehorn this solution through an oversimplification of interesting psychological and philosophical positions. It clearly misrepresents Thoreau's philosophical position at one point, and simplifies the literature on the "naive scientist" theory, to mention but two examples. It is ironic because this is a book whose core ideas hinge on the fact that human life is characterised by uncertainty and we must be careful before we make broad claims. The book does, and it hurts it.

That said, the fairly short read has some interesting things to say. I definitely feel like I am thinking differently after reading it. It would've been a four star rating on that basis, if not for the fact that there is some blatant inaccuracies and misinterpretations of academic literature.

Worth reading, but with a skeptical eye that is open to reading up on the references after.

View all my reviews