In this video we’re going to see 15 stunning visual illusions followed by three cognitive biases which we all share.
We’re doing a deep-dive into the inner workings of the human brain - and how it often gets things wrong time and time again.
The ‘Lilac chaser’ was created ‘in-house’.
The Troxlers Fading image is copyright ‘Mysid’ and used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
This image has not been altered in any way.
The spinning woman gif is copyright Nobuyuki Kavahara and is used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The gif has not been altered in any way. Also may be credited to TillermanJimW.
The ‘Shephard Tables’ are copyright ‘tables’ and the image is used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Coloured parallelograms have been added to aide the video presentation - but the image itself has not been altered.
The Hermann Grid is in the public domain. Created by Mrmw it has been passed into public domain. creativecommons.org/publicdom...
The second ’scintillating grid’ is in the public domain. Created by To Campos1it has been passed into public domain.
The illusory motion image (anomalous motion illusion1) was created by PaulNasca at English wikipedia and has now been passed into public domain.
The black and white ‘cafe wall’ illusion is copyright ‘Fibonacci’ and used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The lower contrast version of ‘cafe wall’ illusion is copyright ‘Fibonacci, JPxG’ and used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The image has not been altered.
The photograph of professor Richard Gregory is copyright Steven Battle and is used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The image has not been altered.
‘The impossible trident’ is in the public domain.
The Kanizsa Triangle image is copyright ‘Fibonacci’ and is used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
It has not been altered in any way.
The ‘checker shadow illusion’ was created by Edward Adelson and vectorised by Pbroks13. It is used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The image was animated to show tile ‘B’ sliding next to tile ‘A’. I make this footage/image available to the public under the same licence conditions above, pursuant to the conditions of the licence.
The muller - Lyer illusion was created by Fibonacci and is used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
It has not been altered in anyway, however, it was cropped and animated for the purpose of the video production.
The ‘motion blindness’ illusion is copyright / created by Mlechowich and used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The ‘Ponzo Illusion’ (train tracks) is in the public domain.
The Ebbinghaus illusion is in the public domain.
Image of African countries
Used under creative commons licence creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Copyright Martin 23230
This image has not been altered but was animated for the purposes of the video presentation.
The USSR, USA and POLISH flag are in the public domain.
The photograph of Bjorn Borg is in the public domain.
The flag of the United Nations is in the public domain.
The photograph of Mahatma Ghandi is in the public domain.
The picture of the model used to illustrate ‘Linda’ in ‘The Linda Problem’ is used under licence from Shutterstock.com. 'Linda' is a fictional character.
The picture of the Monte Carlo casino is used under licence from Shutterstock.com
Footage of the ‘Feminist march’ is used under enhanced licence from Shutterstock.com
Footage of the ‘Human brain’ is used under enhanced licence from Shutterstock.com
Footage of the ‘Roulette Wheel’ is used under enhanced licence from Shutterstock.com
Research Sources
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunc...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Represe...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchori...
thedecisionlab.com/biases/anc...
www.investopedia.com/terms/g/...
I was in a horrible, depressed mood, feeling overwhelmed and tired when I decided only one more video before hauling my useless self to bed. I happened on this video. Within the 1st 2 or 3 minutes, I was totally engaged. For 26 minutes, I forgot I was depressed and useless. More of these please!!!
I’ve just woken up to the comment, what a lovely thing to read. I know exactly what you mean, there’s times that I feel like that and I’m always grateful when I find something to lift me out of it. What an honour to think one of my videos did that for you. Thank you so much for sharing. Tez
@@verynearlyinteresting ❤ Have a lovely Holiday season!
@@patdonnelly9392You too Pat 🎄
I don't know you, but I struggle with depression as well. Please, be kind to yourself. You aren't useless, whether you've found your true worth or not. Take care.
@@katesvensen2261 Thank you very much, you are very kind❤! I was diagnosed with it as a kid because I had eating disorders. That's no longer an issue, but the depression has remained a constant. Been hospitalized several times for it. I'm 61, and have come to accept that there are bad days. I see my dr. and take meds. and Pray. All I can do. Please do take very good care of Yourself, and seek help when needed. You seem like a very sweet person, and you deserve happiness. Please take care!!!
Another good optical illusion is sitting on a train parked at the train station. You look out your window at another train parked at the station. It moves off in the opposite direction to where you are going. You know that you are stopped but you brain is telling you that you are the one that is moving & not train that actually is
It happens when you are parked at a parking lot and a car besides you starts moving it seems like your car is moving 😂
@@BigZhumbemy aunt nearly had a heart attack when this happened to us while parked with a steep drop in front of us.
@@johnlumsden9102 I hope she was okay and all was good
@@BigZhumbe absolutely, just a scare. She thought I forgot to put the car in park.
@@johnlumsden9102 Our brains are tricking us sometimes
The spinning dancer never changed for me. Always span clockwise
Me too.
Me too
Spun
yep that's what I experienced and I even tried to make my perception see it the other way
Me too. it’s the most replayed spot. I think somebody goofed with this one. It’s clockwise without fault.
Understanding optical illusions are good if you want to get into art, and understanding cognitive biases are good to understand to spot whether someone's trying to get one over on you.
From the information we have on Linda if our options were A-Linda is active in the woman’s movement or B-Linda is active in the woman’s movement and a bank teller I’m sure the majority would choose option “A”.
Yes! With the description, it seems less likely she'd become a bank teller than that she is active in the feminist movement.
Yup. The A alternative is 100%. The other one is significantly less depending on surrounding factors.
I think a large part of the attraction to the A + B option is that the Bank Teller (only) option makes it sound like that she's not involved in any activism at all. Based on what we know about Linda, perhaps it's unlikely that she would go into banking without such an outlet, but we're only offered feminism. Option A, of course, doesn't exclude all kinds of other activism that she might be involved with, but that's not necessarily clear from the way the question is posed.
In the 'Linda Problem' we weren't given the choice that she was a feminists only. In this day and age, the probability that a single, 31 year old, university philosophy student is a feminist is nearly 90%. So, that was my reason I chose option 2. There is no bias that would make someone think she was a bank teller. Had we been given that choice alone, I believe more people would have chosen option 1.
it says Linda is a fictional character, but I'm like 90 percent sure I went to university with her.
😆
@@verynearlyinterestingI’d like to know what kind of microphone are you holding in the video??
You can bet with some certainty that it's the kind that captures sound waves.@@jackieg4277
technically we are all fictional characters, legally speaking. a person is merely a persona which responds per sonar. i wish i was making that up.
Since Linda is a fiction, both answers are incorrect because both "answers" are imaginary. The correct answer is: "She is neither, because she is not a real person, but fiction"
Here's why I think the Linda problem is often answered incorrectly. When viewed together we seem to want to recast the first option as (1) Linda is a bank teller and NOT active in the feminist movement. With that assumption (logically wrong, but arguably a natural assumption) , picking option (2) makes more sense. The reason is that we discard the "bank teller" part because that's the same in both options, and judge whether or not she's active in the feminist movement, given her age and background. With that (unstated) assumption, option 2 is reasonable.
I just thought 'insufficient information'.
Also, people have a disposition to try and answer more precisely than required, even when this makes zero sense. For example, if you asked people to give a range when WWII was fought, and you'd win $100 for being right, people will still given limited ranges. The proper answer would be between yesterday and 4 billion years ago. You would always be right, but it lacks precision, and our brains want the precise answer.
The erroneous inference was precisely the point I intended to make. Having made it the rest is reasonable. (I hastily point out I'd answered correctly.) I'm unsure what occurred in the Borg question though. I think having too many options just stymied certain minds.
Another problem with it is it says that Linda is very bright, and also intetested in social justice, when this is clearly a paradox
For all those corporate trainings we all take for security, retail and whatnot, the longest is almost always the answer. Someone had to type it out. No one would type out a long multiple choice question without it being correct
I had an argument with my wife about the odds in our national lottery. This involves choosing 6 numbers between 1 to 49. First it started with her disliking my selection because it had three pairs of sequential numbers. So "What are the odds of that happening?" I then pointed out that every selection has the same odds as any other. Even the sequence 1,2,3,4,5,6 is just as likely to win as any other sequence. Naturally she insisted "That's never going to happen". So I then pointed out, if you really believe that, since EVERY sequence of 6 numbers has an equal chance of winning, we should stop doing the lottery altogether. On a side note, the selection 1,2,3,4,5,6 is a bad choice because, in the event that you win, you'll be sharing that prize with a LOT of people. Better to choose something a bit more random because, although the machines used to pick the winning numbers make random selections, people entering the competition DON'T make very random decisions.
I used to have this EXACT argument with my Dad. He’s no longer with us so this made me smile. Tez
Knowing this, I just let the machine pick.
@@gaoxiaen1 Or you should choose the numbers people choose the least often. Of course, if enough people do that...
@@verynearlyinteresting, you're a FABULOUS presentation man! I also LOVE your accent!
Lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math.
What really needs a video is the fact that different people actually respond differently to some optical illusion
That's true. And not in a single unlucky take. We who are surrounded by rectangular shapes are having different kind of illusion failures than people who are living in round shaped tents. They 100% does see exactly the equal table sizes and many other illusions which are working for us rectangular thinking guys.^^
I find it fascinating that some people will say "That illusion doesn't work on me" or even "I don't see the point of optical illusions". I find some of the illusions absolutely incredible and will study them for ages, but other people aren't moved by them at all. It's strange how we are all the same species, but our brains can be wired quite differently.
@@AutPen38 Yeah it's fascinating. As always, nature is going the most efficient way, so our brain does. As we live since our birth in rectangular shaped buildings our brain did a lot 3D calculations for its orientation in a 3D world. And with that experience it has also found a way for fast detecting the orientation without calculating it every time. And this fast detecting setting lets these optical illusions work for us.^^ I guess it is made subconsciously. It is the stronger part of our brains and our brain believes what it says, even if we see complete the opposite.^^
The anchoring bias is VERY real in the commercial world. I'm convinced shops show the marked up price crossed out and the "lower" price underneath as a ploy because if you'd just showed the same price on its own, people don't think they're getting a deal. Another phenomena similar to anchoring, though slightly different - and I see this on TV adverts - is the cleaning products that claim "cleans X100 more effectively!" I don't understand how impressed I'm meant to be. I mean X100 cleaner than what? Using my finger? A cloth? Spit? And what do they mean "cleaner?" What metric are we using for that definition? There just trying to dazzle you with big numbers.
Good point!
This is why I hate all grocery stores, car salesmen, and marketing people in general. They are insulting our intelligence.
@@robertmorin6495 well, they're right about it, most ppl ain't up there
Anchoring can also be used to coerce people into answering opinion polls with answers that are different than they would be if various options weren't listed. e.g. You can fake the answer to things like "What tax rate is best out of X, Y, and Z?" when it could be that all those options are higher or lower than you would pick if given a free choice. It's partly why Twitter polls are completely useless. The results depend on how you frame the question and which options you offer as responses.
@@AutPen38 Exactly. It's like the example in the video where they suggest Ghandi's age. Limiting your choices from the get go.
Re: The spinning dancer, I learned to control that one at will. I just look at the feet and on the 'bounce' I 'spin' it in my mind and can make it go any way I wish.
Oh wow! You’re the first to say that!
Huh
Ditto that _ second.
I change which leg I see as being closer to the camera, the one pointing down or the one lifted up, then she'll spin in a different direction.
My brain hurts now! Fantastic video, really well presented.
Ah thanks Alan 😊
Even though I am, relatively, an uneducated fellow, I already knew about the optical illusions and biases. But I LOVE the way you demonstrate things in this video. Thumbs up. Subscribed. Thank you. Will go looking for more from you.
*The checker shadow illusion is busted!* I color analyzed still images of the tiles before, during and after the shift. According to the computer: prior to the shift, the A&B tiles are different colors. The B tile changes color 16 times during the shift. The checker shadow illusion isn’t an illusion, but rather a delusion resulting from the power of suggestion.
Glad you posted this comment! I was having real trouble believing that one.They are obviously different colours, it's not an illusion at all!
No it is TRUE there are videos where they don't shift the tile but put a bar of the same color on top of them and you see that it blends to both of them
Sorry, but you did it wrong. Find a picture of the illusion online, print it out, and then cut the B square out to compare next to the A square. If they're actually different, then you can say that the problem is fake. I can't say for a fact what the outcome will be if you do it because I haven't done it myself, but I have a pretty good idea of what it will be.
@Willy_Milano correct, however in this video example the B 100% changes colors. I have seen the example many times. This is edited for dramatics
No regrets spending the time to watch this video. Engrossing, informative, well presented.
Thanks very much Wayne. Tez
Understanding cognitive illusions will assist you in realizing that the world isn't what you presume it to be over what it actually is or isn't. Every life situation is entangled in all forms of gaslighting trickery.
Just found this channel. think you nailed the name. you are a great presenter!
Great video can't wait to prove some people have been mislead using your easy examples instead of trying a deeper argument, nice and to the point to show in some and with influence this is becoming more hardwired not less, to many companies, and media outlets that do not cover news but political tabloids, play on fear instead of information these days and seen so many intelligent people fall into the trap, hopefully this can help me change some minds!! thank you keep up the good work!!!!
Love it, we had a black and white squared lino on a toilet floor, but when idly looking at it, it would separate and one colour would hover above the other, switching levels automatically, same as looking at a crosswired fence around a tennis court.
I was affected by most of the visual illusions but didn't fall for any of the cognitive biases or the length and size of objects.
#1 Is more likely because it's the simplest answer. Adding something else makes it less likely because now two things have to be true.
This is the thought process of a man, Logical... Where as the thought process of a woman is emotional and most likely number 2 for Linda.
Guess you can put it like this: because both events from which you can choose from say that she is a bank teller, then she most likely is a bank teller. Which makes the other part of the option B, pure speculation and a sterotype based on the informations you have learned about her.
No it says nothing about the likelihood of being a bank teller. Maybe it's 1 in 10,000 doesn't matter. That probability is the same and also being a feminist is restrictive so option 2 is less likely by definition. Both may be very unlikely but 2 is less likely than 1
Thank you for great content. Your videos are well made, it isn't everyday you come across videos or channels that are this professionally made.
I wish there was more to this video. The 26 minutes went by so quick. You’re an extremely good presenter ! Subscribed and wish to see more of these biases please 😊
Nice video. Great work. Beautiful trees.
Oh thank you, Tez
An extremely engaging, interesting and entertaining vid! I've just subscribed.
That’s so kind of you, thank you very much. Tez
Absolutely amazing.
Thank Goodness I happened upon this video, I was worried it could have been a problem with my eyesight.. what a relief to know it's happening to everyone
Love that impossible trident, also known as a three-prong one-slot widget. Cheers!
I know it as impossible cricket stumps.Turn it round to see why.
I think knowing the video's subject changed my way of thinking about the biases, I knew there was something up so of course I went for the one that wasn't in conjunction. I even thought I was tricked further and that you would have said "none of the above, she isn't a real person"
Really interesting stuff. Thanks!
I enjoyed this video and appreciate all the references. A lot of work went into this and it shows. I LOVE understated British humor, your accent is charming, and the delivery is engaging. I feel like I learned something and was entertained at the same time.
What a lovely comment to receive, thank you very much. Tez 😊
The obvious flaw in the Linda Question is this. All the information would make it far more likely that Linda is active in the feminist movement than working as a bank teller. Therefore when given a choice between a far less likely outcome alone or a less likely outcome plus a highly probable outcome, we are far more willing to accept the bank teller, which would seem unlikely given her bio, together with a stance which would fit Linda well as described. It's not simply mathematical probability and what you call bias is actually the brain working with all the evidence presented, referenced to all previous experience, making what seems to be a reasonable conclusion.
It's a trick question to begin with the way it's worded and answer choices presented, makes it seem like her being a bank teller is part of the information presented, not part of the choice to be considered. I thought it was asking if shes a feminist or not, not a bank teller or not
I can see where you’re going with this but it still doesn’t alter the fact that the conjoint statement is less probable. Bank teller is available in both options so bank teller alone is most probable. Tez
There are no jobs in philosophy. Bank teller makes sense
@@verynearlyinteresting That might be if not for her backstory. And the wording of the question makes it seem as if she =is= a bank teller, that your only two choices for her are the two presented.
it is worded this way to showcase our brains bias. if the choices were "she's a feminist" or she's a feminist and a bank teller" nearly 100% would choose "she's a feminist" because it is more probable. the fact that she's a feminist has nothing to do with which answer is more likely, same for her being a bank teller, but because of the backstory given our brains only lock on to what we perceive to be the "righter" answer. it's a brilliantly worded, well thought out question.
I see that you were drinking a pint at the Crooked House pub in Netherton. Unfortunately it is no longer there as was burnt to the ground by arsonists some months ago.
Sadly I’m aware of that. Such a shame ☹️
Yes, yes, enjoyed this video very much. Learned something too. Subscribed.
This video made me cross-eyed...nice work!
Wow! Do I see anything correctly? I'm afraid to leave my house, lol.
😆
I have infective endocarditis and have been seeing blurry people looking things... then i found out that the infection causes little blood clots in the eyes. So i conclude my eyes have little "holes" in em and my brain is filling in the information with my brain... Haven't had it confirmed by a doctor but is my theory.
That would make absolute sense Jason - good theory!
@@verynearlyinteresting absolutely!
This is a neat channel. I'm glad it popped up.
Interesting content! Looking forward to seeing more! Subscribed 😊
Oh thank you cindot! Tez 😊
Something that helped me through the conjunction effect is realizing that all the situations where A occurs include situations where A and B occurs, as well as situations where A occurs but not B. With the USSR example, the possibility of the US cutting diplomatic ties with the USSR includes situations where the US cuts diplomatic ties with the USSR due to the USSR invading Poland, as well as other situations which would cause the US to cut diplomatic ties with the USSR.
I don't accept the USSR / Poland / US question to be a "Linda" problem. There are facts that can reasonably be considered in terms of wether Poland will be attacked, and real world events that might realistically inform a likely possibility of events known to the person being asked. Consider asking that question in 1939, 2019 or 2023.
@@peterbaruxis2511 Oh yeah, in truth it's difficult to judge any of these probabilities without being God, but I mean, it's just an example. I suppose one of the major differences is that the US dropping diplomatic ties with the USSR is a lot less likely to be probabilistically independent from a potential poland invasion, compared to a bank teller also being a feminist.
Yep in this case P(A) = .0001 and P(B) = 90%, but you still need to multiply the numbers. People see the 90% and think that's likely, not realizing .9 x anything is smaller
That chick still spinning same direction to me and tried a lot of times and looking away haha.
Same she was always spinning clockwise to me I could not make her spin counter clock no matter how many times tried.
@@Andronicus87Exactly the same thing with me, clockwise no matter what. Only some of the optical illusions worked as well. I'm not saying they don't work, but they don't have the normal effect on me. I also said straight away that chick was just a bank teller 😂
Try blinking
Nice and usefull for teaching purposes. Great video.
That’s great to hear. Thank you. Tez
Great Video!!!!!
It's like I'm in a science class that I actually enjoy. I'm subscribing now :) good question
Thank you for your lovely comment and for subscribing. Tez 😊
I love optical illusions! Thank you for this cool video! Now my eyes hurt! I’m not upset though!
Thank you Stephanie and I hope you’re eyes are ok! Tez
@@verynearlyinteresting they are fine now! Love your channel!!
@@stephaniec3619 I really appreciate that, thanks so much Stephanie. Tez 😊
The cognitive biases were fantastic! Thank you!
Thank you very much, Tez 😊
You made my brain hurt. I researched words and sentences I'd never done before. Thank you. Keep it going. Just gonna subscribe now.
Some really good optical illusions, Only 2 that didn't work for me were 'spinning girl' (always clockwise for me) and the 'flashing green dot' (yellows never disappeared). I believe the 'spinning girl' might have worked if it was done at greater speed, the principle being the same as wagon wheels on stagecoaches in westerns, which I easily spot as going from anti-clockwise to clockwise once acceleration takes place.
The spinning girl illusion really is super strange - trust me, eventually she switches and you can’t switch back, it’s so odd 🤯
@@verynearlyinteresting It works for me.
Likewise, I've seen this many times and it's always rotating clockwise for me.
Always clockwise for me, too.
She always spins clockwise no matter what I do.
What's frustrating is alot of these don't work on me. My right is is slightly lazy to the right. It doesn't make much of a difference in my day to day, but with stuff like this it does. While I'm focusing on the center of an image with my left eye, my right eye sees the thing that's supposed to be disappearing. A friend once told me it's a superpower to be able to see two things at once, but it's actually kind of annoying at times. Like now lol
That’s def a superpower!
Me too-ish. I have a lazy eye that was operated on kind of successfuly. but these illusions generally fail for me. I also can't see the 3D images that were so popular
My eyes were not seeing what he said they were supposed to be seeing when I focused them on the point. I tried twice and it was starting to give me a headache. Does this mean something is wrong with my eyes and/or my brain?
@@debrajones4010no, that alone doesnt mean there is something wrong, people are in general the same but only in general.
Good video. Thank you
Thanks Tim
"It's not an illusion I recall I really don't know clouds at all" Both Sides Now.
So, I find it nearly impossible to stare at any spot. I also have excellent vision in near darkness and color differences. So to get these optical illusions is difficult. It is all about training.
You have a super-brain Nancy! Tez 😊
Great content & presentation. I subscribed as I watched this. TBH, I feared it would b another AI generated waste of my time. What a pleasant surprise I received. Thank You !
Thanks Mark, that’s such a nice comment for me to receive. And thank you for subscribing, that’s very appreciated. Tez
Interesting stuff!!
Excellent lesson and greatly illustrated. The conjunction error is a hard-to avoid pitfall. The lesson is: be wary of people adding strange conjunctions into all of your choices, they're tricking you into accepting and confirming something as fact, while distracting you with the rest. Just reframe the question and leave the weird bits out and answer THAT confidently. Watch them crumble. Bonus points if you chide them for the infantile word games.
This is really interesting and the bias problem is why logic is so hard. The conclusions seem to defy common sense.
I teach Psychology... I am going to use this with my students. I think they'll really enjoy it. Thank you!
Cheers mate.... from Jacksonville, Florida. Excellent video !
Thank you so much, that’s very kind of you. But I must ask … are you THE Fibonacci? Tez 😊
@@verynearlyinteresting OOOOHH.... don't tell anybody !!!!😜
@@giacomofibonacci1022 I’m going to take that as a possible ‘maybe’. What an honour for me to get a comment from you. Thank you so much. Tez
I've seen pretty much all of these, I love to see these all in one place
That coloured square... i still cant understand it, i see it as you move it but my brain doesnt compute it, I'm a dumb dumb 😂
It’s mad isn’t it?? Trust me, it’s the same colour - I just cropped it and moved it. Crazy
@@verynearlyinteresting @SonicStealth IKR? I even refused to believe it so much myself, that i actually screenshot the video and repeated the crop+move in an image editor and lo & behold it is _indeed_ the same color 🤯
@@lagmonster7789 I knew people wouldn’t believe me when I made that section 😆
The silhouette of a pretty girl makes my brain spin anyways.
😆
Very good!
The first one was working, when I stared at it, its slowly drawing what's on my brain. AMAZING!
Most likely is option #1, a bank teller.
Ok, a little dizzy after this video Lol.. I'd just like to say, I got the original Linda post correct. Here's my crazy reasoning.. She's deeply concerned about issues of discrimination, so if she's a femminist activist, then that's kind of discriminating towards men.. a little hypocritical if she's concerned about all issues of discrimination.. 🤔 Does that make sense?
Wow that’s a great point Jane 😆
Fascinating!
He says you can't switch the direction of the spinning dancer on command but I learned how to do it.
Oh wow!
@@verynearlyinteresting, for me, it's easiest by focusing on the feet or the hands, and while it's spinning, just imagine it spinning the opposite way and then all of a sudden it just flips. It's actually a little more complicated and it's hard to explain through text but that's essentially what I'm doing.
Mind...screwed! Off for a lie down in a dark room now....
😆 Thanks for watching though 😊
Seriously, the" Linda Problem" responses are created by the question itself. The human brain is being asked to make a binary choice between a neutral option (bank teller) and a spiced up option (bank teller who is active in a feminist movement). The preface to the question describes Linda as being outspoken and single, a philosophy student and concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice (an active feminist would need these qualities). When given two options in this context, the human brain will pick the "best" choice based on the information available, not a choice based on an abstract mathematical probability of "two or more options conjoined being less than one." If the question being asked was a mathematical one, the response would be different, but this is a logic/probability problem based on limited information demanding a response. The real question here is: Why does the human brain feel the need to respond to the command to answer a question with such limited information? Why not respond: "not enough information" and simply not answer it?
Because it is safer to see a lion behind the leaves when it isn't always there, vs not seeing the lion because you don't have enough information to be sure.
Great video!! I subscribed
Thank you so much Francis. Terry ;)
Me thinks the question isn't about which is better: Emotions/Bias vs. objective reality. It's about understanding the differences between the 2 and how to ethically use/leverage each of them. I'm a marketing strategist who specializes in storytelling (and also how to streamline processes) and when my brain gets tired, I watch videos like this. I love feeling both excited and humbled at once. In marketing, or anything creative, when trying to go with what's most probable, the best thing I can come up with is a kind of.. entropy. The more everything starts to look the same, the more that just catering to the lowest common denominator probably isn't going to solve many of the problems humans will be facing, in particular, with the growth of AI. The phrase: "When you try to appeal to everyone, you appeal to no one" is true with humans. This needs to be a factor.
The Linda problem: The question seems poorly defined. It is presented in such a way that it can be and probably is interpreted as there being only two choices for Linda, and so it is a given that she is a bank teller. The chance of her being a bank teller is then precisely 1:1. The question then becomes: what are the chances that Linda is active in the feminist movement vs not being active in the feminist movement? Colllege, a degree in philosophy, deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, participated in antinuclear demonstrations. Considering the events of my life over many decades, that makes the chance of her being active in the feminist movement very high. Also, define "active". Many are what are called "coffee shop feminists" who might call themselves "active" but who do not engage in demonstrations or protests. By your conclusions, I would say that what you mean is, in the totality of all things that Linda could be, what are the chances that she is a bank teller? What are the chances that she is a bank teller and active in the feminist movement? How do those chances compare?
I think you have a point that people may interpret it as two choices for Linda - your argument is very well put indeed. I included the Bjorn Borg and USA/USSR examples as a way to vary the examples as this did cross my mind too. Thanks for your comment, very much appreciated! Tez 😊
@@verynearlyinteresting After quizzes and tests in school, I got to see a lot of teachers give a heavy sigh as I approached them with my test. Can you guess why? ;')
@@AlienRelics I can 😆 and more power to you I say!!!
I agree with what you're saying, and this is speculation on my part but I imagine if there was a third option: "Linda is neither a bank teller, nor a feminist activist," a lot of people would still go for an option including bank teller in the answer. This third option seems even more likely following conjunction logic, right? One conjunction is always more likely than two, so no conjunctions must be more likely than one. After all it's more likely you are not a random thing than you are one. But....my thinking is that because 'bank teller' is included in 2 of the 3 options, it tricks us into thinking it must be more likely because its included in more of the potential answers. After all, why would it be repeated in the possible answers if it is not so. But in reality I don't think it has any influence. I believe this may be yet another form of bias based on the answer appearing multiple times.
@@verynearlyinteresting I taught myself electronics, starting at 9. I went back to school to get a degree, because I got in on a grant and it has been very difficult to get interviews without a degree. So I had decades of experience. I was responsible for the teacher changing an answer or even removing some questions from the book for nearly every chapter. Wrong answers, or questions so poorly worded as to be meaningless. In Navy electronics school in troubleshooting lab, I would sometimes have to tell them the problem they meant me to find, =and= problems in the worn out equipment. For the final lab, they damaged the test equipment (without telling us, of course). Everyone was meant to fail the first time through. It's a Kobayash iMaru. I found the damage, repaired it, and passed. My reward was to be accused of cheating, and get grilled for hours by the chief.
I don't care you moved that B square out of the shadow, it is definitely different to A, in my mind lol. The spinning model I couldn't see spinning any other than clockwise. Linda is no.2
The A and B is definitely a mind bender - and it’s true … same colour! Thanks for watching and commenting. Tez 😊
You can find that in printed form, with a card with two holes that you can place over the picture and see that they are the same shade. There is also a color version where the squares look blue and yellow, until you place the card over and find they are both grey.
@@verynearlyinteresting Unless sq. B is intentionally placed in the center of the grid as the darker color, which would therefor make the entire (chess board) grid not follow the natural (chess board) pattern, design, grid, et al. So the only way they are the same color is if the grid (chess board) is laid out incorrectly.
5:46 This is the best one of all. and the proof that our perception of reality is our brain's best guess. and not reality.
I've seen the spinning dancer one before, and I've never understood what the fuss is. It's clockwise. There absolutely are enough visual clues to discern it's rotation. The toes are pointing towards us, then to the left, away from us, to the right, and back towards us. That's the definition of clockwise.
Just goes to show we are creative beings and create something out of nothing.
Good point!
These are the best.
Interesting and enjoyable.
being half blind (my right eye really only sees blurry things moving) i only ever see just part of those first two tricks dissapearing. never see all of the ring disapear , nor do i ever see all of the dots dissapear.
Great video.
😊thank you. Tez
Interesting, entertaning and pleasantly British. Thanks a lot 🤝
That was very nearly interesting! Subscribed!
Oh thank you!!! 😊😊. Tez
Brilliant mate. New subscriber ✌🏻
Awesome! Thanks very much Jon. Tez
Cool video, I liked the optical illusions. The only one that didn't work for me was the spinning dancer. Always spins clockwise no matter how many times I look at it. As for the Linda problem, the two options both include bank teller so I think we just assume she is a bank teller no matter what.
I had that issue but I looked away and looked back- I happened to blink just after I looked back & it ws then that she changed direction.
The visual switched for me when I focused on the grounded foot for a second.
Try blinking, that usually works.
Great video. I enjoy your presentation style. Good luck with your channel! I'd love to run an idea past you for a possible future episode, if you were so inclined.
Its amazing great illusion being made
A is more probable because it is just one fact and B states the same fact, but since B adds a 2nd fact in conjunction with the 1st, it's LESS probable that BOTH things are true instead of just 1.
Good luck with your channel!
Thanks Peter, that’s very kind of you. Tez
1:43 Do y'all see a blue rectangle forming in as well? I do for some reason, and when it forms again it changes sizes. Strange!
Thank you, got my sub.
Thank you so much Brent
One way of looking at the Linda problem is that 1. includes all bank tellers, while 2. only Includes a subset of bank tellers.
That’s a great way of putting it. Tez
Brilliant vid you blew my mind but i do have a head ache now so thanks for that 😆😆
Oh no 😆. Thanks for your comment Matthew 😊. Tez
great video
Thanks Shaky. Tez
Gamblers fallacy: Excellent point ! You know, what good are odds and statistics, when you get hit by lightning ? Did it help you, not to get hit ? Did the statistics help decrease a chance of you personally getting hit ? You could be anywhere on the spectrum of likeliness and you'd never know.
I had a different reaction to the gamblers fallacy. If someone was flipping a coin and it kept coming up heads, I would assume that it was a trick , 2 headed coin.. If the roulette wheel kept stopping on black, I would assume that the wheel was rigged somehow. If I knew that everyone who stood in an open field holding a lightning rod during a storm was killed by lightning, I just would not do that.
@@jimtaylor4302 in real life, a rigged game is surely the most likely reason for such results, I forgot about that. My point was just to show another perspective on people who say - no way, statistically that "can't" happen...
In a case that you know something will be a 50/50 chance, the previous result does not change the 50/50 of the next. However, in more random situations, a repeat same result, very likely means the same result will happen again.
Well done, I mean, you have done this well 👍👍
Thanks Simon. Tez
When I saw the Linda thing, the first thing that I noted was BOTH said she was a bank teller... So which is more probable? The one that's common to all. That's how my brain worked... Yes, I chose A. Now... I'm curious why he didn't bring up the Monty Hall special math trick... When given an option, and then you are allowed to change after getting more information, you are less likely to change your mind. That's simplifying it, but... Three doors... one has $1,000,000 behind it - the other two have donkeys. You pick one. Monty then shows you one of the other doors for free, showing one of the donkeys. Do you change your door? The correct answer is yes - you should always switch. You originally had a 1/3 chance of guessing right, 2/3 wrong. He shows you one of the bads, so the other door becomes 2/3 compared to the 1/3 you have. It's not 50/50. Let's give you 1000 doors instead... You select one. That is a 1 in 1000 chance of being correct, 999/1000 of being wrong. We then open 998 doors showing the donkeys. You're left with your selection and one other. Now would you switch? That other door represents the 999/1000 - not 1/2. Unless you were super lucky to guess right, you should switch. You should always switch. I love math!
THANKS !! I found the whole video interesting, But the second 1/2 half was the Most Interesting of all... It kind of goes along way into explaining Politics or the different reasoning between Left and Right... Because of what they watch / read / hear on there side makes them believe whole heartedly there side is Right :) It depends ALOT on how they are asked or presented with 1 side or the other Seems like to me anyway :) Great Video !! can't Waite to go thumb through some more Keep them coming.
Aww thank you so much, that’s a lovely comment to read. Tez
This is an amazing point !! I like this comment a lot 😁
Something I find fascinating is that you can train yourself to reduce or remove bias in (written) language and mathematics (by learning about probability) but it seems impossible to train your visual cortex to see things as they actually are. i.e. You can learn to be aware of unconscious biases and do something to reduce their impact, but you can't stop your eyes seeing a pink dot appearing to turn green, or a rabbit turning into a duck.