(May be too tired at the moment to comment coherently, but if I go back and sleep I won't come back to this:)
On your reference to Thinking Fast and Slow, which I haven't read: One thing I have particularly thought is difficult to keep in mind or to keep in memory is a kind of picture or thought or situation that I have called "ambiguous," but where I had to customize the definition of "ambiguous" a little to do it.

What I mean is a situation in which, for practical or fundamental or whatever reasons, it is not automatically obvious what part of the situation should be paid attention to. Complexity can do this; the fact that they involve choices of priority can do this; there can be other reasons. This is commonly the shape of subjects or controversies when we first encounter them and are investigating them. In order to retain the ambiguity, we would have to remember a whole lot, including a lot of contradictory stuff, a lot of material that we didn't immediately get the cruciality level of, etc., etc.; this is a very burdensome requirement. So, while we remember any reactions we had and things that supported them, the fact that the situation was ambiguous, and therefore that our reactions or conclusions were not entirely deterministic or firm or necessary, tends not to be something retained.

Accordingly it has been a theory of mine that ambiguous situations tend to foster or lead to very firm opinions and to polarized, strongly diametrically opposed ranges of opinions - the fact that they themselves don't indicate or justify such firmness entirely notwithstanding.