The Story of How I, Who Believed 'I Am Right,' Was Devastated by Yale University's Insights: An AI Book Review of 'The Mind Club'

"I'm the type of person who can judge things quite calmly." Have you ever thought that?

I used to think so too. Working in a medical field where I am required to make evidence-based decisions every day, a sense of pride that "my thinking is reasonably well-trained" had taken root somewhere in my mind before I knew it.

However, when I read "The Mind Club," by Professor Woo-kyoung Ahn of Yale University, that confidence was brilliantly shattered. Moreover, it wasn't just shattered; it even unraveled "why I had such confidence" in the first place. This is quite a shocking reading experience.

This time, I will share the "8 Thinking Traps," which I learned from this book, while also incorporating my own experiences in the medical field.

The story of how I, who believed 'I am right,' was devastated by Yale University's insights

To begin with, what is a 'thinking trap'?

First of all, I want to state clearly that this is not a book that points at you and says, "You are stupid." On the contrary, it is a book that stands on the premise that "the human brain is not rational to begin with," and reaches out to say, "That is precisely why we should deal with it this way."

When this lecture was held at Yale University, an episode is introduced where the grand lecture hall, which gathers the world's greatest intellects, was packed every week. In other words, it was the "smart people" who needed these insights. I believe the essence of this book lies here.

So, what kind of "traps" are in our brains? They are broadly divided into eight types. Explaining all of them in detail would take up a whole book, so I will focus on three points that I particularly "feel in the field" and provide a digest of the rest.

Trap 1: The brain that feels 'familiar things = correct' — Fluency Bias

Have you ever watched a BTS dance video? When you watch those sophisticated movements over and over, a strange thing happens. You start to genuinely think, "Wait, maybe I can do that too."

Of course, if you actually try to dance, the illusion collapses in three seconds. But this feeling of "I feel like I can do it" arises from the mechanism where our brain mistakes "processing information smoothly" for "understanding" or "mastering" it. This is the "fluency bias."

This happens very often in the medical world as well. For example, when I was a resident, I thought I had "completely understood" a procedure after reading textbooks and guidelines many times, but when I actually tried to do it, my hands wouldn't move at all. Now, it makes sense to me that that experience was a typical example of fluency bias.

What's even scarier is that this fluency affects our judgments in general, such as "companies with easy-to-pronounce names are more trustworthy" or "sentences written in easy-to-read fonts feel more correct." In other words, even if the content is nonsense, we believe it just because "the way it is told is smooth." Part of the mechanism by which conspiracy theories spread lies here.

The prescription for this trap is very simple: "Actually try it." Simulations in your head always succeed. It is only in real action that you fail. That friction is the only medicine to correct overconfidence.

Trap 2: The brain that can only see 'information convenient to oneself' — Confirmation Bias

I feel this is the most powerful and troublesome of the eight traps.

Confirmation bias is the tendency to collect only information that supports what you already believe and unconsciously ignore evidence to the contrary. The misdiagnosis cases of doctors introduced in this book made my spine chill as someone involved in the same medical field.

When a doctor first thinks of a specific diagnosis, they only ask the patient questions that reinforce that hypothesis and overlook subtle signs indicating other possibilities. Once the brain decides "this is it," it tries to protect that story and rejects contradictory data.

The paradox that the book points out here was the biggest shock to me. It says, "The more intelligent a person is, the more likely they are to fall into confirmation bias." Why? Because people with abundant knowledge are skilled at "intellectual defense techniques," such as cleverly making excuses or constructing logical explanations after the fact when they encounter facts that are inconvenient for them.

In short, intelligence is a tool for approaching the truth, but it can also be a weapon for justifying one's own mistakes. As a certified public psychologist and someone involved in interpersonal support, I have reread this passage many times.

The countermeasure is to 'consciously look for counter-evidence'. Instead of looking for 'grounds for why I am right,' ask yourself, 'If I were wrong, what evidence should exist?' I have realized that this one habit can dramatically change the quality of one's judgment.

Hole No. 3: The True Nature of 'Can't Stop, Won't Stop'—Loss Aversion and Status Quo Bias

'I want to change, but I can't.' Isn't this a struggle that everyone has felt at least once, even outside of a counseling setting?

A central concept in behavioral economics, 'loss aversion,' refers to the property that humans feel the pain of a loss about twice as strongly as the joy of an equivalent gain.' This psychology binds us to the 'status quo' in all sorts of situations.

Even if a new option is objectively superior, the fear that 'I might lose something by changing' creates an irrational attachment to the current situation. Furthermore, the 'sunk cost fallacy,' where one cannot quit a clearly failing project because it would be a waste of the time and money already spent, also stems from this loss aversion.

In a medical setting, I feel that organizational resistance to 'changing the way things have been done' is exactly a product of this bias. Even when new evidence emerges, people cling to conventional methods because 'that's how we've always done it.' This is not a weakness of will, but a structural tendency of the brain.

The keys to avoiding this hole are 'reframing' and 'third-party perspective'. Reframe choices not as 'losses' but as 'gains.' And ask yourself, 'If I were facing this situation from a completely blank slate today, which would I choose?' This shift in perspective is extremely effective for breaking emotional attachments.

The Remaining Five Holes—A Digest

From here on, I will briefly explain the remaining five holes.

The brain that seeks 'why' too much (fabrication of causality). Our brains decide that 'one is the cause' just because two events happened at the same time. The reason the treatment method called 'bloodletting' continued for centuries was that people kept interpreting it as 'thanks to the bloodletting' if the patient recovered, and 'it was too late' if they died. Unless we consider a comparison group of 'what would have happened if we did nothing?', we will remain trapped in this hole forever.

The trap of 'thinking you understand' (illusion of knowledge). If asked to explain how a bicycle works, almost no one can answer accurately. We mistake the knowledge that exists on the internet or in our communities for 'our own knowledge.' The countermeasure recommended by this book is the 'Feynman Technique'—try explaining it out loud as if you were teaching it to a child who knows nothing. The places where you stumble are exactly the holes in your own knowledge.

The problem where the brain 'interprets' on its own (dictatorship of interpretation). We are not recording the world objectively like a camera. The brain actively 'edits' information using past experiences and preconceptions as filters. Whether you feel a long line at the checkout is a 'waste of time' or a 'little break' changes your stress response completely. The idea that it is not the event itself, but the 'interpretation' that is the true nature of stress, is something I feel clinically as well.

The 'person who knows' cannot understand the 'person who doesn't know' (curse of knowledge). Once you know something, you cannot imagine 'yourself before you knew it.' When a boss gives instructions to 'be more logical,' the assumption that the definition of 'logical' is shared with the subordinate is itself an expression of this bias. The difficulty experts have in teaching beginners, and many of the misunderstandings between couples, have their roots here.

The brain that prioritizes immediate pleasure (present bias). We choose small rewards right in front of us over large rewards in the future. The true nature of procrastination is also this. The fact that the Sydney Opera House was 10 years behind schedule and the budget ballooned to 14 times the original amount was also caused by the optimism that 'the future me will be able to do it better.' The best strategy for this hole is not to rely on willpower, but to 'hack the environment.' For example, if you want to clean your room, schedule a friend to come over. Creating a system that leaves no escape route for your future self is the most realistic strategy.

'Full of holes' is okay—how to live with an imperfect brain

Having read this far, some of you might feel a little depressed, thinking, 'Is my brain this junky...?' But please rest assured. The author of this book also says this at the end.

'You cannot perfectly control all of your thinking, and you don't need to.'

I was saved by these words. Trying to plug every hole perfectly is itself another bias called perfectionism. For daily decisions that don't have much impact, it's fine to coexist with bias. However, only when making truly important decisions, stop and think. 'Am I being deceived by fluency?' 'Is there any counter-evidence?' 'How does it look from the other person's perspective?'—this small habit of 'resistance' prevents fatal judgment errors.

Just because you know the mechanism of an illusion doesn't mean the illusion itself disappears. Even if you know the lines in the Müller-Lyer illusion are the same length, they still look like different lengths. Cognitive bias is exactly the same. That is precisely why it is important to protect yourself with 'systems'.

Our brains were optimized for survival on the African savanna, but they have not kept pace with modern internet society or complex medical systems. I believe that understanding this mismatch itself is a form of wisdom for living in the modern age.

It is likely impossible to completely fill the holes in our thinking, even in a lifetime. However, if you know where the holes are, you can walk carefully. And if more people walk carefully, perhaps society will become a slightly fairer, more tolerant, and kinder place.

There are holes in your brain, and there are holes in mine. But by knowing this today, you have certainly taken a step forward from who you were yesterday.

Thank you so much for staying with me until the end. I hope today's article serves as a catalyst for you to think about your steps moving forward.

#TheHoleInOurThinking #CognitiveBias #BehavioralEconomics #LearningForMedicalProfessionals #YaleUniversity