Final answer:
The 'thinking slow' or rational thinking aspect of the dual system hypothesis is less biased but requires more cognitive effort and energy, as opposed to quick and automatic 'thinking fast'. It is vital for accuracy and critical thinking in complex or new situations.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to the dual system hypothesis, the type of thinking that is less biased but more effortful is known as 'thinking slow' or rational thinking. This form of cognition requires conscious attention, focus, and considerable effort to engage in, as opposed to the more instinctive, quick, and error-prone 'thinking fast'. While 'thinking slow' is effortful and energy-consuming, it is also more precise and less susceptible to bias.
Indeed, this deliberate mode of thought necessitates a significant expenditure of cognitive resources as it involves rational computation and critical reflection. It is necessary when confronting novel, complex, or dangerous situations that fall outside our normal routine or automatic processing capabilities. To counter cognitive biases and ensure more accurate outcomes, it's essential to engage in this more analytical and reflective mode of thinking.
Understanding the dynamics of the dual system hypothesis is crucial for fields that value accuracy and critical thinking, such as science, which utilizes both descriptive and hypothesis-based science approaches. Appreciating the energy demands on deliberate thinking can help us recognize the need to consciously choose to engage in this slower, more reasoned thought process when necessary.