Making Decisions Much Much Faster Than Ten Years Ago?

Revisiting my piece on

What Has Happened to this World in Barely Eight Years?

I will pick up my "spontaneous" second point.

2) Making Decisions Much Much Faster Than Ten Years Ago

To address this problem, an introvert would ponder how one can slow down that decision making process, avoid making rash and reactive responses, and then make a decision that is consistent with one's value system, 

An entrepreneur would think about how to develop a method and a money-making service to enable consumers to immediately make a decision which would maximize the revenue of merchants most ready to turn that decision into a sales. This practice is already pervasive in the Internet world with Ads which are generated based on algorithms of "Recommenders." 

Is there anything dangerous in using such recommendations of options? Probably not, because the final decision to pick one of the recommendations is till in the control of the consumer. However, the next stage of Recommenders may advance to making a decision for you, based on knowledge about your decision criteria and your value system. Is that dangerous? Maybe not, when it comes to consumer transactions, because you can still refuse to accept the "decision". But, is there a slippery slope trend to then directly connect your payment for that recommended decision and a guarantee that you can cancel without penalty, within a certain grace period? Another way to exploit human forgetfulness and laziness?

Back to the original topic about global wealth disparity, what kind of decisions involve individuals either as one person or as a member of different groups, e.g., city, state, country, or the world. Are decisions being made or not even presented for making? Are we making such decisions, if any, more hastily than ten years ago?

I would say yes to all these questions. However, the decisions are not of the type that directly impact global wealth disparity. The typical decisions we make everyday are in response to stimulations such as news, and observation of certain behavior in our encounters. We have a choice of reacting positively or negatively to these stimulations. Quick responses tend to be based on our immediate likes or dislikes. More tolerant responses usually require us to be in a mood of empathy. The more frequently we react the same way to similar stimulations, the more we become "conditioned" into reacting that way. Over time, our value system becomes modified, even without our knowing.

Take for example, we watch news of terrorist attacks, and the people who are identified as the attackers are shown as dark-skinned and Muslims. Over time, our brain connects terrorists with dark skin and Muslims. News of illegal immigrants are shown with people of a certain race or nationalities. Repeated exposure to such images affect our brain's connection among these characteristics. Certain unacceptable behaviors of certain types of tourists, if one is daily exposed to it, not just in news, but in person, will create a connection in our brain between that class of tourists with bad behavior. If we are not careful, generalization into a whole country or a race could take place in our brains.

Prejudices are on the rise. I think this phenomenon is happening broadly around the world. It has to do with our increased exposure to news, images, and sound-bites that are divisive and unpleasant. 

Let's ponder on this some more before we consider how to counteract this problem.