people who don't keep score don't make good predictions.
Entirely true.
If there would be a general belief...
General beliefs are generally ignorant nonsense, particularly with regard to mathematical abstractions on aggregates that people have no concrete experience dealing with themselves.
Fun fact from Ian Hacking, via Wikipedia:
The word Probability derives from the Latin probabilitas, which can also mean probity, a measure of the authority of a witness in a legal case in Europe, and often correlated with the witness's nobility. In a sense, this differs much from the modern meaning of probability, which, in contrast, is a measure of the weight of empirical evidence, and is arrived at from inductive reasoning and statistical inference.
This was quite an eye opener to me when I first saw it. We take empirical testing and verification for granted, but if you were just unaware of it, what else go by to determine the "truth" of something? Scientific method is obviously not in the genes, but I bet you that obedience to authority is, even in "truth".
Experts still generally thrive on authority, not empirically demonstrated competence.
Your average bald monkey is just not that clever.
This was quite an eye opener to me when I first saw it. We take empirical testing and verification for granted, but if you were just unaware of it, what else go by to determine the "truth" of something? Scientific method is obviously not in the genes, but I bet you that obedience to authority is, even in "truth".
Experts still generally thrive on authority, not empirically demonstrated competence.
I am not a historian of science and it might be "just-so story", but it was my understanding that one of the reasons Galileo's tel...
How to see into the future, by Tim Harford
The article may be gated. (I have a subscription through my school.)
It is mainly about two things: the differing approaches to forecasting taken by Irving Fisher, John Maynard Keynes, and Roger Babson; and Philip Tetlock's Good Judgment Project.
Key paragraph: