I do not think your claim is what you think it is.

I think your claim is that some people mistake the model for the reality, the map for the territory. Of course models are simpler than reality! That's why they're called "models."

Physics seems to have gotten wiser about this. The Newtonians, and later the Copenhagenites, did fall quite hard for this trap (though the Newtonians can be forgiven to some degree!). More recently, however, the undisputed champion physical model, whose predictions hold to 987 digits of accuracy (not really), has the humble name "The Standard Model," and it's clear that no one thinks it's the ultimate true nature of reality.

Can you give specific examples of people making big mistakes from map/territory confusion? The closest thing I can think of offhand is the Stern Report, which tries to make economic calculations a century from now based on our current best climate+social+political+economic models.

Belated apologies for cranky tone on this comment.

Done, thanks for the feedback!

I made the mistake I'm talking about---assuming certain things were well-known.

I actually think Liron's slideshow needs a lot of work, but it seems very much like the kind of thing LWers should be trying to do out in the world.

the slideshow was completely useless to me

Yes, of course it was. It was created for teenagers who are utterly unfamiliar with this way of thinking.

its quality was poor

OK. Can you improve it or do better?

Definitely worth reading up. K & T are the intellectual fathers of the entire modern heuristics and biases program. There was some earlier work (e.g. Allais) but from what I hazily recall that work was fairly muddled conceptually.

Funny. I feel like on OB and LW utility theory is generally taken as the air we breathe.

Upvoted for calling your own post "completely wrong"!

Vladimir - "concentrated confusion", "a thousand angry cats": that's exactly the kind of spice that your earlier post needed! :-)

Also fewer function words...

• Let me add to the chorus of "you rock!" This is a nice piece of work. I don't know how you got the chance to present to a group of young people about this stuff, but kudos also to whoever gave you that opportunity.
• Some have pointed out potential improvements. This seems like a solid way for anyone interested to add a quantum of effort to the cause---improve the presentation a bit, and post your improved version somewhere. (Where?)

I don't at all disagree that for those who can do it, the CS/math parlay is excellent.