[Script Info]
Title: 
[Events]
Format: Layer, Start, End, Style, Name, MarginL, MarginR, MarginV, Effect, Text
Dialogue: 0,0:00:06.81,0:00:08.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Meet Lucy.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:08.00,0:00:09.98,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,She was a math major in college,
Dialogue: 0,0:00:09.98,0:00:14.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and aced all her courses in probability \Nand statistics.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:14.11,0:00:18.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Which do you think is more likely: that \NLucy is a portrait artist,
Dialogue: 0,0:00:18.46,0:00:23.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,or that Lucy is a portrait artist \Nwho also plays poker?
Dialogue: 0,0:00:23.49,0:00:27.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,In studies of similar questions, up to 80 \Npercent of participants
Dialogue: 0,0:00:27.51,0:00:30.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,chose the equivalent \Nof the second statement:
Dialogue: 0,0:00:30.01,0:00:33.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that Lucy is a portrait artist \Nwho also plays poker.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:33.65,0:00:38.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,After all, nothing we know about Lucy \Nsuggests an affinity for art,
Dialogue: 0,0:00:38.37,0:00:42.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but statistics and probability \Nare useful in poker.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:42.18,0:00:44.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And yet, this is the wrong answer.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:44.74,0:00:46.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Look at the options again.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:46.53,0:00:50.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,How do we know the first statement \Nis more likely to be true?
Dialogue: 0,0:00:50.27,0:00:54.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Because it’s a less specific version \Nof the second statement.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:54.45,0:00:58.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Saying that Lucy is a portrait artist \Ndoesn’t make any claims
Dialogue: 0,0:00:58.12,0:01:01.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,about what else she might or might not do.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:01.62,0:01:06.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But even though it’s far easier to imagine\Nher playing poker than making art
Dialogue: 0,0:01:06.51,0:01:08.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,based on the background information,
Dialogue: 0,0:01:08.39,0:01:13.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the second statement is only true if she \Ndoes both of these things.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:13.07,0:01:17.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,However counterintuitive it seems \Nto imagine Lucy as an artist,
Dialogue: 0,0:01:17.27,0:01:23.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the second scenario adds another condition\Non top of that, making it less likely.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:23.23,0:01:27.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,For any possible set of events, the \Nlikelihood of A occurring
Dialogue: 0,0:01:27.76,0:01:33.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,will always be greater than the likelihood\Nof A and B both occurring.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:33.48,0:01:37.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If we took a random sample of a million \Npeople who majored in math,
Dialogue: 0,0:01:37.37,0:01:41.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the subset who are portrait artists might \Nbe relatively small.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:41.52,0:01:43.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But it will necessarily be bigger
Dialogue: 0,0:01:43.73,0:01:47.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,than the subset who are portrait artists \Nand play poker.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:47.39,0:01:51.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Anyone who belongs to the second group \Nwill also belong to the first–
Dialogue: 0,0:01:51.00,0:01:52.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but not vice versa.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:52.49,0:01:57.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,The more conditions there are, \Nthe less likely an event becomes.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:57.60,0:02:02.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So why do statements with more conditions\Nsometimes seem more believable?
Dialogue: 0,0:02:02.22,0:02:05.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,This is a phenomenon known as \Nthe conjunction fallacy.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:05.54,0:02:09.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,When we’re asked to make quick decisions, \Nwe tend to look for shortcuts.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:09.34,0:02:12.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,In this case, we look for what seems \Nplausible
Dialogue: 0,0:02:12.46,0:02:15.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,rather than what is statistically \Nmost probable.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:15.47,0:02:19.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,On its own, Lucy being an artist doesn’t \Nmatch the expectations
Dialogue: 0,0:02:19.90,0:02:22.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,formed by the preceding information.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:22.07,0:02:24.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,The additional detail about \Nher playing poker
Dialogue: 0,0:02:24.81,0:02:28.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,gives us a narrative that resonates \Nwith our intuitions—
Dialogue: 0,0:02:28.17,0:02:30.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it makes it seem more plausible.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:30.34,0:02:34.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And we choose the option that seems more\Nrepresentative of the overall picture,
Dialogue: 0,0:02:34.68,0:02:37.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,regardless of its actual probability.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:37.63,0:02:41.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,This effect has been observed \Nacross multiple studies,
Dialogue: 0,0:02:41.22,0:02:44.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,including ones with participants \Nwho understood statistics well–
Dialogue: 0,0:02:44.90,0:02:47.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,from students betting on \Nsequences of dice rolls,
Dialogue: 0,0:02:47.62,0:02:53.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to foreign policy experts predicting \Nthe likelihood of a diplomatic crisis.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:53.22,0:02:57.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,The conjunction fallacy isn’t just a \Nproblem in hypothetical situations.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:57.56,0:03:00.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Conspiracy theories and false news stories
Dialogue: 0,0:03:00.69,0:03:05.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,often rely on a version of the conjunction\Nfallacy to seem credible–
Dialogue: 0,0:03:05.27,0:03:08.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the more resonant details are added \Nto an outlandish story,
Dialogue: 0,0:03:08.90,0:03:11.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the more plausible it begins to seem.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:11.75,0:03:14.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But ultimately, the likelihood \Na story is true
Dialogue: 0,0:03:14.64,0:03:19.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,can never be greater than the probability \Nthat its least likely component is true.