The three lessons of Joe Flom

Introduction

In the publication "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell, the centered theory that Gladwell presents is that often the decisions and observations made in only a split-second, in the blink of the eye, are better than conclusions which are made after extensive considered. To present and justify this concept Gladwell recounts the lives of several persons who make, or have made, significant snap conclusions with a high grade of success or failure. He then explains the reasoning behind each article and relates it back to his initial principle. The narratives include the story of a fake Greek statue and the debate of it's authenticity, a retired U.S. general who defeated the best of the infantry with quick conceiving, and a group of policemanman agents who slain an blameless immigrant because of a tragic misreading, amidst many others. While I discovered many of these anecdotes intriguing and do acquiesce to a certain issue that on occasion trusting your intuition is more effective than boundless thinking, numerous of the examples utilised in Blink oversimplify or misstate the significance of "those first 2 seconds" (8).

Discussion and Analysis

One example in "Blink" where I accept as true Gladwell is overstating the reality is with his story of Paul Ekman and his method to assess faces to determine if somebody was lying or not. In the publication Gladwell writes in a very matter-of-factly way about Ekman and his ability to notify if somebody is lying by observing video of them, however if Ekman had really developed a surefire way to notice a lie, it would revolutionize the fairness system. While I do believe Ekman may be better adept to make educated estimates due to his study, I don't fully believe that he is as adept as Gladwell appears to recount him. Another difficulty I discovered with Blink is in Gladwell's description of the occurrence where a false figurine is traded to the Getty museum. He fights back his gut-feeling idea through this first article in "Blink" by saying how several art experts instantly knew something was wrong with the figurine while months of chemical tests verified to be incorrect when they discovered the figurine was legitimate. But Gladwell doesn't so much show that intuition is more effective than articulate conceiving as display that the Getty museum made a poor decision. Had they allowed the art experts to have more than a fast outlook maybe they would have been adept to support their sentiments and been able to verify that the figurine was a fake before the Getty bought it. I also discovered it a bit strange that Gladwell uses the notion of "thin-slicing" (23) is a book about quick conclusions. While this method does gaze at very quick actions made by people's subconscious, thin-slicing in and of itself is the product of comprehensive thinking. The concept didn't easily came to John Gottman in the blink of an eye, but instead was developed over years of study and testing. The development of this method as ...