Thinking, fast and slow; or, Nancy Grace and Dan Abrams

---

In his book “Thinking, Fast and Slow,” Daniel Kahneman posits that we humans, as mammals/primates, have two different decision-making systems in our brains. There’s a “fast” system, which does quick evaluations on the basis of likelihood and present evidence, and makes a quick decision. There is also a “slow” system, which takes time and evaluates more carefully.

The “fast” system is useful for emergencies. The “slow” system is useful for – well, just about everything except emergencies.

Sadly, most of us use the “fast” system for everything, which means that – for us – the obvious reason seems always to be the right reason. Even more sadly, we rationalize these “fast” decisions: we take our quickly-drawn conclusions and try to justify them mock-logically.

Sometimes it works. Sometimes it’s just silly.

Which brings me to Dan Abrams and Nancy Grace.

For whatever reason, ABC’s “Good Morning America” often uses these two as tandem commentators on court cases in the news. Dan is reasoned and careful and takes the law into account. Nancy, on the other hand, always knows immediately who’s to blame and mocks Dan for not following her lead.

See? Dan is slow-thinking. Nancy is fast-thinking.

It’s sickening to watch, sometimes. Dan is reasoning through a case, and Nancy will accuse him of “sitting in his ivory tower.” Obviously (for Nancy), the guiltiest-looking person in the room must be the perpetrator. Right?

No, Nancy. Not right. Lots of innocent people are in jail right now because of thinking like yours.

Nancy used to be a real court prosecutor. Now she’s just an imaginary prosecutor, allowed by ABC to pontificate on cases about which she (and the rest of us) know next to nothing. I’m glad she’s not in the real legal system. She’d do a lot of harm there. I’m sorry, however, that ABC gives her a platform on “Good Morning America” to hold forth on these “he looks guilty, so he must be guilty” views. I’m sure there are viewers who consider her an authority, and think: if Nancy Grace says/believes it, it must be true!

But it ain’t.

She’s a dimwit in love with her own opinions who has forgotten how the law works. She wants opinion to be law.

That’s a creepy thought.

“Good Morning America” really shouldn’t give her this kind of exposure. Except, I’m sure, that she’s good for ratings, because fast-thinking quick-judging viewers like to hear her expound on her ill-judged beliefs, which agree with their own.

(Sigh.)

---

Play

---

I’ve written twice before about Lynda Barry, the inspired writer / artist whom I was privileged to hear speak at the Rhode Island School of Design last spring.

She talked about so much that I could hardly take it all in. I made notes when I got home, and tried to remember everything, because it was all interesting and funny and new.

She talked about the way children play. She described a game her brother used to play: he’d draw random dots on a sheet of paper, very methodically; then he’d eat a bowl of cereal, staring at the sheet of paper; then he’d take a pen and play dive-bomber on the sheet of paper, crossing out dots. The last dot won.

Now that’s play.

But play is not something you can just do. How many times did your parents say: “Why don’t you just go play?” And did you wonder: “What does that mean?”

Play is a state of mind. Go think about Lynda Barry’s brother staring at that sheet of paper, eating his cereal, and consider what’s going on in his mind.

Best story of all: Lynda was in a restaurant, watching a mother and son at a nearby table. Mother was talking on her cellphone. Son, about six years old, was talking to his bacon. “I’m gonna eat you!” he said to his bacon. Then he made the bacon talk: “No no no! Don’t eat me!” This went on for some time. Lynda was spellbound. This was real play.

Until the mother suddenly saw her son playing with his food. “What are you doing?” she snapped at him.

The little boy dropped the bacon as if awakened from a dream. “Nothing,” he said.

Playing. Just playing.

People don’t play enough. Adults don’t play enough.

Partner and I play with our stuffed animals: we make them talk, and argue, and fight, and even make out.

Sounds crazy, doesn’t it?

Believe it or not, it’s quite the reverse. I think it helps keep us both sane.

---

Brain medicine

---

I have taken various kinds of psychoactive medication over the past ten years. (I'm kind of, um, tense. And I have what are charitably called “moods.”)

 

 

I like my current medication. I am much calmer now, and much less likely to freak out over stupid things. I'm still irritated by idiots, but I'm not infuriated by them quite so much.

 

 

But – and here's the funny thing – I find that my memory (which used to be, frankly, amazing) is not so amazing anymore. (I read recently that my medication is prescribed for people with obsessive-compulsive disorder, which makes sense; the medication seems to take the urgency away from everyday situations, and makes everything fuzzy around the edges.)

 

 

But I am calmer now. And, as I said to someone recently, if this is how normal people feel most of the time, I'm sorry I missed out on it for so long.

 

 

I do miss the sharpness and focus I used to have. But I don't miss the nervousness and tension and depression and obsession over details.

 

 

Partly, I know, it's just the passage of time. I'm in my mid-fifties, and my brain is getting mushy, like a soft-boiled egg. My fuzziness and loss of memory may just as well be the progressive degeneration of my brain tissue.

 

 

Who knows?

 

 

Anyway, I'm not going to obsess about it.

 

---