Hanlon’s Razor is useful, but not nearly as useful as Thompson’s Razor.
Coined by Ben Thompson, it complements Hanlon’s razor:
“Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by competence”
Maybe the head of HR appears incompetent, but is actually optimizing over dimensions that you don’t know about. Or maybe they have access to information that you don’t have.
Mentally, Hanlon’s razor shifts you from anger to hubris. Thompson’s Razor shift the hubris into curiosity.
Thanks, Gilad. I wasn't aware of Thompson's Razor.
Though I don't necessarily agree with the default implication that Hanlon's shifts you to hubris. Especially if you happen to be competent about the subject.
Or back to the HR example: if a leader is failing to communicate about what they're optimising for, it's a failure on their end.
Or, put in different words: when people don't understand you, it's most often because you're not doing a good enough job at explaining yourself
Hanlon’s Razor is useful, but not nearly as useful as Thompson’s Razor.
Coined by Ben Thompson, it complements Hanlon’s razor:
“Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by competence”
Maybe the head of HR appears incompetent, but is actually optimizing over dimensions that you don’t know about. Or maybe they have access to information that you don’t have.
Mentally, Hanlon’s razor shifts you from anger to hubris. Thompson’s Razor shift the hubris into curiosity.
Thanks, Gilad. I wasn't aware of Thompson's Razor.
Though I don't necessarily agree with the default implication that Hanlon's shifts you to hubris. Especially if you happen to be competent about the subject.
Or back to the HR example: if a leader is failing to communicate about what they're optimising for, it's a failure on their end.
Or, put in different words: when people don't understand you, it's most often because you're not doing a good enough job at explaining yourself