Rolf Dobelli
Author of The Art of Thinking Clearly
About the Author
Rolf Dobelli has an MBA as well as a PhD in economic philosophy from the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland. He is co-founder of get Abstract, the world's leading provider of business-book summaries, and is the author of six works of fiction. In addition, Dobelli is the author of The Art of show more Thinking Clearly, which became an international bestseller and has been translated into forty languages, and is the founder and curator of WORLD.MINDS, a foundation of distinguished thinkers across science, business, and culture. show less
Image credit: www.villach.at
Works by Rolf Dobelli
The Art of the Good Life: 52 Surprising Shortcuts to Happiness, Wealth, and Success (2017) 260 copies, 2 reviews
Die Kunst des klugen Handelns: 52 Irrwege, die Sie besser anderen überlassen (2012) 146 copies, 2 reviews
Stop Reading the News: A Manifesto for a Happier, Calmer and Wiser Life (2019) — Author — 141 copies, 2 reviews
Klar denken, klug handeln: 104 Denkfehler und Irrwege, die Sie besser anderen überlassen (2015) 10 copies
Success Through Less 2 copies
ARTI I TË MENDUARIT 1 copy
Arta de a gandi limpede 1 copy
Nghệ thuật tư duy rành mạch 1 copy
Ben Kimim? 1 copy
Arta de a trăi fără știri 1 copy
Viisaan toiminnan taito 1 copy
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Birthdate
- 1966-06-15
- Gender
- male
- Education
- University of St. Gallen (economics)
University of St. Gallen (Ph.D.) (philosophy) - Occupations
- writer
manager
entrepreneur - Nationality
- Switzerland
- Birthplace
- Lucerne, Switzerland
- Places of residence
- Bern, Switzerland
- Associated Place (for map)
- Switzerland
Members
Reviews
I spotted [b:Stop Reading the News: A Manifesto for a Happier, Calmer and Wiser Life|48581422|Stop Reading the News A Manifesto for a Happier, Calmer and Wiser Life|Rolf Dobelli|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1572070830l/48581422._SY75_.jpg|73913219] in the library on the jubilee weekend and the title really spoke to me, because I was avoiding the news particularly assiduously at the time. I've done so to a greater or lesser degree since 2016, so the show more author did not really need to convince me. Nonetheless, I found Dobelli's reasoning interesting to follow. He makes a lot of good points, but also some tiresome over-generalisations (especially about hierarchies and ideologies - I do not believe you can avoid the latter). The book is a quick and enjoyable read. Each short chapter is, ironically, about the length of a news article. The current media business model is critiqued in a particularly succinct and effective manner:
Dobelli also uses some memorably entertaining similes:
Two topics I found particularly thought-provoking were informed voting and terrorism. One thing that keeps me periodically checking local news is so I have an informed basis for voting in elections. Dobelli tackles this in chapter 31, pointing out that you can research election candidates without regular news consumption. In the UK, websites like https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ do facilitate this. On terrorism, he quotes an Israeli historian as follows, 'The theatre of terror cannot succeed without publicity. Unfortunately, the media all too often provides this publicity for free. It obsessively reports terror attacks and greatly inflates their danger, because reports on terrorism sell newspapers much better than reports on diabetes or air pollution'. Before mass media, it certainly took a great deal more effort to terrify a whole population.
In my view, the big weakness of the book is not discussing social media. During periods when I've stopped reading the news because it was overwhelming and terrifying, I was still constantly exposed to it on social media - twitter, to be specific. Around March 2020, I completely stopped using twitter as the COVID-19 panic was more than I could bear. This was quite isolating, as I use it to keep up with a bunch of friends living hundreds of miles away. I assume the same effect would occur with facebook, if I used facebook. To stop reading the news in the 2020s is not as simple as avoiding TV news, radio bulletins, newspapers, and news websites. Social media is saturated in contextless snippets of current events. If I want to keep up with friends and their cats, I apparently have to endure this. At present I don't read news websites at weekends, therefore regularly have no idea what the hell my friends are talking about or reacting to on twitter. Today, for instance, a twitter friend posted a thread about 'the laMDA situation'. It's Sunday so I have no clue what that means and lack the energy to find out.
Although this book is clearly argued and wide-ranging, its brevity does result in over-simplification. For more depth, I suggest [b:The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power|26195941|The Age of Surveillance Capitalism The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power|Shoshana Zuboff|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1521733914l/26195941._SY75_.jpg|46170685], [b:The News: A User's Manual|18282869|The News A User's Manual|Alain de Botton|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1392003791l/18282869._SX50_.jpg|25756618], and [b:The People Vs Tech: How the Internet Is Killing Democracy|39403470|The People Vs Tech How the Internet Is Killing Democracy (and How We Save It)|Jamie Bartlett|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1521917332l/39403470._SY75_.jpg|61062281]. I don't think there is an easy or settled optimum for news avoidance. I frequently adjust my approach based on my mental tolerance, the state of current affairs, and any other factors that arise. During most of the pandemic, especially periods when cases and deaths were rising rapidly, I only read Scottish news and pretended that America was a fictional place that only existed in TV and movies. It's a pity that local news websites have particularly annoying clickbait formats, as news that occurs within several miles of your home can be genuinely useful. I also appreciate Guardian book reviews for updates on potentially promising reading matter.
My current dilemma is which is worse to read during workdays, twitter or the Guardian and BBC? I tried logging out of twitter on my phone for a week, with the result that I read news articles as micro-breaks instead. That wasn't more calming! But twitter has its own whiplash effect that I find difficult to deal with, neatly described in this tweet. Ideally I'd take a break by reading a few pages of a book, but unfortunately that is not something I'm capable of. A few pages turns into 75 to 250; books are far too involving. Maybe I should subscribe to a hardcopy periodical like the London Review of Books? Despite 13 years using twitter and aggressive curation of my feed, I still haven't built up a robust tolerance for it - although in my defence, during that time both twitter and the world have got worse. show less
The news media, whether big or small, is obsessed with the immediate. Gripping stories, shrieking images, shocking videos, and astonishing 'facts' grab our attention. This is how their business model works. The adverts that finance the whole circus will only be sold if they're going to be seen: if they're surrounded by garish news stories. The upshot? Anything subtle, complex, and abstract, anything that develops slowly and is remotely abstruse, will be systematically dismissed by the media, and by ourselves, despite being the content that actually matters more to our lives and genuinely furthers our understanding of the world.
Dobelli also uses some memorably entertaining similes:
In short, it's a serious mistake to think that we need to form an opinion about everything. Ninety percent of our opinions are superfluous. Yet the news is constantly urging us to form opinions. This robs us of concentration and inner peace. Opinions are like noses - everybody has one. Consuming the news is like having a whole face full of noses.
Two topics I found particularly thought-provoking were informed voting and terrorism. One thing that keeps me periodically checking local news is so I have an informed basis for voting in elections. Dobelli tackles this in chapter 31, pointing out that you can research election candidates without regular news consumption. In the UK, websites like https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ do facilitate this. On terrorism, he quotes an Israeli historian as follows, 'The theatre of terror cannot succeed without publicity. Unfortunately, the media all too often provides this publicity for free. It obsessively reports terror attacks and greatly inflates their danger, because reports on terrorism sell newspapers much better than reports on diabetes or air pollution'. Before mass media, it certainly took a great deal more effort to terrify a whole population.
In my view, the big weakness of the book is not discussing social media. During periods when I've stopped reading the news because it was overwhelming and terrifying, I was still constantly exposed to it on social media - twitter, to be specific. Around March 2020, I completely stopped using twitter as the COVID-19 panic was more than I could bear. This was quite isolating, as I use it to keep up with a bunch of friends living hundreds of miles away. I assume the same effect would occur with facebook, if I used facebook. To stop reading the news in the 2020s is not as simple as avoiding TV news, radio bulletins, newspapers, and news websites. Social media is saturated in contextless snippets of current events. If I want to keep up with friends and their cats, I apparently have to endure this. At present I don't read news websites at weekends, therefore regularly have no idea what the hell my friends are talking about or reacting to on twitter. Today, for instance, a twitter friend posted a thread about 'the laMDA situation'. It's Sunday so I have no clue what that means and lack the energy to find out.
Although this book is clearly argued and wide-ranging, its brevity does result in over-simplification. For more depth, I suggest [b:The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power|26195941|The Age of Surveillance Capitalism The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power|Shoshana Zuboff|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1521733914l/26195941._SY75_.jpg|46170685], [b:The News: A User's Manual|18282869|The News A User's Manual|Alain de Botton|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1392003791l/18282869._SX50_.jpg|25756618], and [b:The People Vs Tech: How the Internet Is Killing Democracy|39403470|The People Vs Tech How the Internet Is Killing Democracy (and How We Save It)|Jamie Bartlett|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1521917332l/39403470._SY75_.jpg|61062281]. I don't think there is an easy or settled optimum for news avoidance. I frequently adjust my approach based on my mental tolerance, the state of current affairs, and any other factors that arise. During most of the pandemic, especially periods when cases and deaths were rising rapidly, I only read Scottish news and pretended that America was a fictional place that only existed in TV and movies. It's a pity that local news websites have particularly annoying clickbait formats, as news that occurs within several miles of your home can be genuinely useful. I also appreciate Guardian book reviews for updates on potentially promising reading matter.
My current dilemma is which is worse to read during workdays, twitter or the Guardian and BBC? I tried logging out of twitter on my phone for a week, with the result that I read news articles as micro-breaks instead. That wasn't more calming! But twitter has its own whiplash effect that I find difficult to deal with, neatly described in this tweet. Ideally I'd take a break by reading a few pages of a book, but unfortunately that is not something I'm capable of. A few pages turns into 75 to 250; books are far too involving. Maybe I should subscribe to a hardcopy periodical like the London Review of Books? Despite 13 years using twitter and aggressive curation of my feed, I still haven't built up a robust tolerance for it - although in my defence, during that time both twitter and the world have got worse. show less
A compilation of brief summaries of 99 commonly known psychological fallacies in logical thinking. Each chapter is 2-4 pages long and covers one such fallacy. Enough breadth, but no depth.
I might add a 100th error: Depth and Breadth Illusion. In most circumstances, breadth does little to compensate for the lack of depth; likewise, depth can rarely sufficiently compensate for the lack of breadth.
I think the epilogue is more "authentic" than any other part of the book. In the very last show more chapter, the author finally explains what thinking errors are, what irrationality is, and why we fall into these traps.
He gives three explanations of why we persistently make mistakes:
1) Evolutionary psychology convinces us that it pays to be wrong about the same things.
Thinking is a biological phenomenon. Evolution has shaped it just as it has the forms of animals or the colors of flowers.
[...]
In our hunter-gatherer past, activity paid off more often than reflection did. Lightening-fast reactions were vital, and long ruminations were ruinous. If your hunter-gatherer buddies suddenly bolted, it made sense to follow suit -- regardless of whether a saber-toothed tiger or a boar had startled them. If you failed to run away, and it turned out to be a tiger, the price of a first-degree error was death. On the other hand, if you had just fled from a board, this lesser mistake would have cost you only a few calories. It paid to be wrong about the same things. Whoever was wired differently exited the gene pool after the first or second incidence. We are the descendants of those homines sapientes who tend to flee when the crowd does. But in the modern world, this intuitive behavior is disadvantageous. Today's world rewards single-minded contemplation and independent action. Anyone who has fallen victim to stock market has witnessed that.
[Evolutionary psychology] explains the majority of flaws, though not all of them. [...] Some bugs in our thinking are hardwired and have nothing to do with the "mutation" of our environment.
Why is that? Evolution does not "optimize" us completely. As long as we advance beyond our competitors (i.e., beat the Neanderthals), we can get away with error-laced behavior.
2) Our brains focus on reproduction rather than the search for truth -- we are prone to being persuaded and convinced.
A second, parallel explanation of why our mistakes are so persistent took shape in the late 1990s: Our brains are designed to reproduce rather than search for the truth. In other words, we use our thoughts primarily to persuade. Whoever convinces others secures power and thus access to resources. Such assets represent a major advantage for mating and for rearing offspring. That truth is, at best, a secondary focus and is reflected in the book market: Novels sell much better than nonfiction titles, in spite of the latter's superior candor.
3) We often make decisions based on our emotions and intuitions rather than logic and reason.
Finally, a third explanation exists: Intuitive decisions, even if they lack logic, are better under certain circumstances. So-called heuristic research deals with this topic. For many decisions, we lack the necessary information, so we are forced to use mental shortcuts and rules of thumb (heuristics). [...] In short, we often decide intuitively and justify our choices later.
And the author's solution?
To make things simple, I have set myself the following rules: In situations where the possible consequences are large (i.e., important personal or business decisions), I try to be as reasonable and rational as possible when choosing. I take out my list of errors and check them off one by one, just like a pilot does. I've created a handy checklist decision tree, and I use it to examine important decisions with a fine-tooth comb. (Comment: I hope the author will be able to resist the deception of checklists and combat the feature-positive effect, as he outlines in Chapter 95) In situations where the consequences are small (i.e., regular or Diet Pepsi, sparking or flat water?) I forget about rational optimization and let my intuition take over. Thinking is tiring. Therefore, if the potential harm is small, don't rack your brains; such errors won't do last damage. You'll live better like this. Nature doesn't seem to mind if our decisions are perfect or not, as long as we can maneuver ourselves through life -- and as long as we are ready to be rational when it comes to the crunch.
Although the book is moderately interesting and entertaining, I couldn't help but ponder the point of publishing such books as this. A quick index of logical fallacies? More publicity for the author?
Perhaps the most valuable part of this book is the Note on Sources.
I doubt that "the art of thinking clearly" can be cultivated by merely reading through this list of 99 thinking errors. Rather, the art of thinking well and clearly can be mastered and refined only through trial and error, one improvement after another.
My rating: 2.5 / 5 show less
Perhaps the best book on wisdom of life. There are several that highlight the common mistakes that we make but not many that prescribe a solution to these problems. This book covers pretty much all the mental follies along with simple but practical approaches to avoid those follies. The wisdom itself is now new but the approach is quite interesting. Each chapter is hardly 4-5 pages, very succinct, and self-contained.
People who worry about how to build character, how to be happy, calm, etc. show more should definitely read this book. I would recommend buying even a hardcopy as this is a book that you would read several times in a year.
For each of the techniques the author provides more information in the appendix from where it comes. Some of them are other books and some articles, essays etc. You can delve into more detail if you feel a need for it. However, in my experience, I believe if you take some of his suggestions as it as and simply implement them in your life; you would definitely see a remarkable improvement in your life satisfaction. show less
People who worry about how to build character, how to be happy, calm, etc. show more should definitely read this book. I would recommend buying even a hardcopy as this is a book that you would read several times in a year.
For each of the techniques the author provides more information in the appendix from where it comes. Some of them are other books and some articles, essays etc. You can delve into more detail if you feel a need for it. However, in my experience, I believe if you take some of his suggestions as it as and simply implement them in your life; you would definitely see a remarkable improvement in your life satisfaction. show less
FYI: I won this book from goodreads Giveaways, but that in no way influenced my review.
The Art of Thinking Clearly presents a bunch of anecdotal evidence to support commonly known fallacies in logical thinking. You know that hindsight is 20/20, we cling to our narratives, and think we'll be like the models in makeup ads if only we buy their product, plus a bunch of other semi-obvious ways in which we end up making bad decisions (or poorly rationalized flukes that still turn out okay). This show more book *might* be the reminder you need to think critically about what assumptions and misconceptions you are basing your decisions on. However, if you're already a critical thinker you probably won't learn too much from this book. Also, it doesn't really seem academically researched enough to be otherwise worthwhile. If it was more humorous it would at least make the obviousness more palatable.
To its benefit, you will almost definitely find at least one logical fallacy within that applies more to you personally (the, "Oh, I didn't realize it, but I definitely do that!" moment), and I suppose there's a chance that it may make a huge difference in your life. Also, it's a pretty quick read, with separate 'chapters' (a page or two) for each fallacy. So readers who prefer informational shorts over long form compositions will appreciate the format. show less
The Art of Thinking Clearly presents a bunch of anecdotal evidence to support commonly known fallacies in logical thinking. You know that hindsight is 20/20, we cling to our narratives, and think we'll be like the models in makeup ads if only we buy their product, plus a bunch of other semi-obvious ways in which we end up making bad decisions (or poorly rationalized flukes that still turn out okay). This show more book *might* be the reminder you need to think critically about what assumptions and misconceptions you are basing your decisions on. However, if you're already a critical thinker you probably won't learn too much from this book. Also, it doesn't really seem academically researched enough to be otherwise worthwhile. If it was more humorous it would at least make the obviousness more palatable.
To its benefit, you will almost definitely find at least one logical fallacy within that applies more to you personally (the, "Oh, I didn't realize it, but I definitely do that!" moment), and I suppose there's a chance that it may make a huge difference in your life. Also, it's a pretty quick read, with separate 'chapters' (a page or two) for each fallacy. So readers who prefer informational shorts over long form compositions will appreciate the format. show less
Lists
Awards
You May Also Like
Associated Authors
Statistics
- Works
- 35
- Members
- 2,649
- Popularity
- #9,694
- Rating
- 3.8
- Reviews
- 42
- ISBNs
- 156
- Languages
- 17
- Favorited
- 1















