1. Referring to "The $64,000 Question",
page 183 states, "The accepted method of calculation
does, indeed, value Paul's prospects at infinity
although no one would be willing to purchase it at a
moderately high price." Why is there a maximum price
that people are willing to pay, even when they know,
statistically speaking, they should more than make back
their money?
2. "The value of an item must not be based on
its price... but rather on the utility it
yields. The price of the item is dependent only on the
thing itself and is the same for everyone; the utility,
however, is dependent on the particular circumstances of
the person making the estimate," (184). Is this
statement universally true? Can you think of any
exceptions?
3. Did Samuelson's monosyllabic paper ("Why We Should
Not Make Mean Log Of Wealth Big Though Years To Act Are
Long") oversimplify his work?
4. At what level does competition become more of a
hinderance than a reason to push yourself? Does it make
sense to have such a mindset in the sciences where calm
logic is key?
5. On page 210, it says, “The word of
authorities is not supposed to matter in science. The
reality is that famous names sell theories as well as
athletic shoes.” Is there a way to counter scientific
celebrity biases?
6. Where do our personal “bliss
levels” lie? Are they based more on what we need or what
we want?