Hanlon's Razor

Napoleon Bonaparte famously declared:

‘Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.’

Goethe wrote: 

'Misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent.'

I have found myself many times in the last 10-15 years attributing malice to be the driving mechanism for other's behaviors when in reality a lack of knowledge (which by definition means intelligence) was the driver of their behavior. This can become a deeper conversation the further we unpack intelligence as whole and really makes one step back when they think about behavior as a proxy for intelligence - especially as we head into a world of super intelligence.

A great primer about Hanlon's Razoe is found here from FS Blog for anyone who wants to read it.

TARS and I unpack it a little bit here in this session of the back and forth:

‍Me: I am looking to learn about Hanlon's Razor - the mental model. What do you know about about it?

TARS: Hanlon's Razor is a mental model that suggests a way to interpret the actions of others more benignly. It's often phrased as: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." In other words, it advises against assuming bad intentions behind someone's actions when they can just as easily be explained by ignorance, mistake, or laziness.

The principle is useful in helping to avoid paranoia and unnecessary negative emotions by not jumping to the conclusion that people are intentionally trying to cause harm when they do something that affects us negatively. Instead, Hanlon's Razor encourages giving people the benefit of the doubt, at least until we have clear evidence to the contrary.

It's a reminder that human error, oversight, and lack of knowledge are more common than deliberate wrongdoing. This mental model can be applied in everyday life, in the workplace, and in analyzing historical events, among other scenarios. By applying Hanlon's Razor, we can maintain a more positive outlook, reduce conflict, and improve communication and understanding in our interactions with others.

Keep in mind, though, while it's a helpful heuristic, it's not a universal truth. There are certainly cases where actions are driven by malicious intent, and it's important to consider the full context of a situation.

Me: Yeah I know. It isn't an absolute mathematical model but it is quite interesting. My accountant is a forensic CPA and he told me that about 90% of the cases where they found mistakes/fraud they were unintentional and based on ignorance and stupidity versus 10% being based on bad acting and malice.

TARS: That's a fascinating insight, and it really underscores the practical value of Hanlon's Razor in professional settings, especially in areas like forensic accounting. It highlights a critical aspect of human nature and error: much of the time, issues arise not from a deliberate intent to deceive or harm but from misunderstandings, mistakes, and lack of knowledge.

Forensic CPAs have a unique vantage point, given their role in investigating financial discrepancies, errors, and fraudulent activities. Their work offers them a clear perspective on the motivations behind financial mishaps. The statistic your accountant shared suggests that while malice and deliberate fraud are present, they're much less common than errors made out of ignorance or incompetence.

This insight also speaks to the importance of education, robust systems, and checks and balances in financial management and accounting. By focusing on improving knowledge and systems, many unintentional errors could potentially be mitigated. It also implies that when investigating discrepancies, starting with the assumption of error rather than fraud might not only be more charitable but also more accurate in the majority of cases.

However, that remaining 10% associated with malice underscores the necessity for vigilance and thorough investigation. In those cases, assuming good intent could overlook deliberate wrongdoing. So, while Hanlon's Razor is a useful heuristic, it's also clear that professionals need to maintain a balanced approach, considering all possibilities until the evidence points clearly in one direction or another.

Me: Totally. Yeah intent is probably the key to understanding and analyzing behaviors and actions.

TARS: Absolutely, intent is often the dividing line between a mistake and malice, a misunderstanding and manipulation. Understanding intent can change the entire context of an action and significantly impact how we respond to it. This is why professions that require analyzing behaviors and actions, such as forensic accounting, psychology, law enforcement, and management, place a heavy emphasis on discerning the intent behind actions.

Recognizing intent can be challenging because it requires us to look beyond the surface and consider a range of factors, including the individual's past behavior, the circumstances leading up to the action, and any potential benefits or consequences that might motivate someone. It's a complex puzzle that often lacks clear-cut answers, making skills like empathy, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence invaluable in interpreting others' actions accurately.

Moreover, considering intent encourages us to adopt a more nuanced view of human behavior, recognizing the complexity and multifaceted nature of motivations. It helps in fostering a culture of understanding and learning, rather than blame and punishment, especially in situations where mistakes are made without malice. This perspective is crucial not only in professional settings but also in personal relationships, where assuming the best in others can lead to more positive interactions and outcomes.

However, as with Hanlon's Razor, while understanding intent is critical, it's also important to remain vigilant against the possibility of deliberate wrongdoing. Balancing trust and skepticism is a delicate act but one that's necessary for navigating the complexities of human behavior effectively.

Me: Let's dig into this a little more...if stupidity is the actual real driver most of the time, then intelligence (levels of intelligence) are the key to not making stupid decisions or exhibiting stupid behaviors. This means more knowledge is always better than less...

TARS: That’s a compelling point, and it touches on a nuanced debate about the role of intelligence and knowledge in decision-making. While higher intelligence and more knowledge can indeed reduce certain types of mistakes and poor decisions, the relationship isn't always linear or straightforward. Here are a few nuances to consider:

1. Types of Intelligence

Intelligence isn’t just one-dimensional. Beyond the conventional IQ (which measures analytical reasoning, among other things), there are multiple forms of intelligence, including emotional intelligence (EQ), social intelligence, practical intelligence, and more. Each plays a crucial role in making sound decisions in different contexts. For instance, EQ can be just as important as IQ in navigating social situations and making decisions that affect both ourselves and others.

2. Knowledge vs. Wisdom

More knowledge can indeed help in making informed decisions, but wisdom—the ability to apply that knowledge effectively in various situations—is equally crucial. Wisdom involves judgment, timing, and understanding context, which aren’t guaranteed by simply having more information. Sometimes, an overload of information without the ability to discern what’s relevant can lead to analysis paralysis or poor decisions.

3. Cognitive Biases and Heuristics

Humans are prone to cognitive biases and heuristics that can skew our decision-making, regardless of our intelligence level or the amount of knowledge we possess. For example, confirmation bias can lead us to favor information that confirms our pre-existing beliefs, and the Dunning-Kruger effect can make less competent people overestimate their abilities. Being aware of these biases and actively working to mitigate them is essential for intelligent decision-making.

4. Domain-Specific Knowledge

Expertise or knowledge in one area doesn’t automatically translate to other domains. Highly intelligent individuals can make poor decisions in areas outside their expertise. Thus, recognizing the limits of one’s knowledge and when to seek advice from others is a key aspect of making smart decisions.

5. The Role of Emotions

Emotional states can significantly impact decision-making. High intelligence or vast knowledge doesn’t make one immune to the influence of emotions, which can sometimes lead to decisions that might be considered "stupid" in hindsight. Learning to manage and understand one’s emotional responses is crucial for sound decision-making.

In summary, while higher intelligence and more knowledge can reduce the likelihood of making uninformed decisions, they are not foolproof safeguards against all forms of poor judgment. A holistic approach that includes emotional intelligence, critical thinking, awareness of cognitive biases, and the cultivation of wisdom is essential for consistently making well-informed, intelligent decisions.

Guess it is better to more intelligent...definitely contributes to better fitness odds in Darwinism...