testtest

Hanlon’s Razor: Never Attribute to Malice That's Adequately Explained by Stupidity

BobM said:
A very good interesting article about peoples intentions, perspectives and reaching them. Has good definition, possible origin, some examples and applications.

Hanlon’s Razor: Never Attribute to Malice That Which is Adequately Explained by Stupidity – Effectiviology

effectiviology.com effectiviology.com
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is adage for a reason. All sorts of other factors are relevant. To use the first example in that article, let's say you didn't receive an invite to an event. It may be logical to assume it was an oversight or it was lost in the mail. But what if the person sending the invites knows you have been having an affair with his daughter ? It's certainly illogical to always assume the worst, but no more illogical than always assuming some other logical explanation.

These sort of things are bandied about as if they have some basis in provable fact or as if they are some immutable law. In reality they are opinions based on observations.
 
Bassbob said:
Yeah, this is adage for a reason. All sorts of other factors are relevant. To use the first example in that article, let's say you didn't receive an invite to an event. It may be logical to assume it was an oversight or it was lost in the mail. But what if the person sending the invites knows you have been having an affair with his daughter ? It's certainly illogical to always assume the worst, but no more illogical than always assuming some other logical explanation.

These sort of things are bandied about as if they have some basis in provable fact or as if they are some immutable law. In reality they are opinions based on observations.
Click to expand...
Pretty much guides not gospels used in reaching opinions is all. Generally speaking, I look for the best in whoever or whatever 1st as rule of thumb. Sometimes it's there and sometimes it isn't.

Lot of truth in many things that aren't usually thought to be gospel though? Like some traits seem to be repetitious while some aren't for example? Negative influences usually caused or created by unusual or distressing circumstances and occurrences like ones caused by heavy loss are generally considered a one time trait. If base or causal influence doesn't change, trait usually remains same. Again, only generally speaking, not gospel. Are almost always differences.
 
Hmmm…. Interesting, at the very least. (I read most of it; will finish later).
I am going to assume this principle is intended largely for the more casual of human interactions: mundane daily contact, the office, etc etc.

I can definitely think of times - some of my own, in fact - when it would be ( and was ) far more prudent to assume the worst, maintain your guard (distance, or whatever) until you know for sure what the motive or intention is. It also pays to apply self control and reserve final judgment in such cases, of course.

yeah, Hanlons Razor has its uses. At the end of the day, it’s basically just common sense though. Another kind of prudence.
 
TidalWave said:
Hmmm…. Interesting, at the very least. (I read most of it; will finish later).
I am going to assume this principle is intended largely for the more casual of human interactions: mundane daily contact, the office, etc etc.

I can definitely think of times - some of my own, in fact - when it would be ( and was ) far more prudent to assume the worst, maintain your guard (distance, or whatever) until you know for sure what the motive or intention is. It also pays to apply self control and reserve final judgment in such cases, of course.

yeah, Hanlons Razor has its uses. At the end of the day, it’s basically just common sense though. Another kind of prudence.
Click to expand...
Yep, is a fairly long involved read.
Depending on scenario, assuming the worst may be beneficial, then slowly remove factors if have enough time to evaluate better. It can pay to assume and prepare for worst case scenario and deescalate from there. But, constantly assuming the worst can lead down a miserable path of cynicism and over skepticism if practiced too often? Likely some of the cause / results of so much negative media news announced currently?
 
I suppose in a respectful society, this may have merit. In today's society where everyone takes an aggressive position or is "deeply offended " by anything you say or imply, I don't see a need for Hanlon's razor. I think it much wiser to be on the defensive from the onset. Not necessarily acting on it, but to be wary, don't be someone's pigeon. As far as how it was applied in another thread, between us, sure. This is a safe environment where we can respectfully disagree with one another and still get along. In the real world, I think the delayed reasoning and rationalization could result in damages to yourself or others. Just my opinion, 🤔 worth every penny you paid for it.😏 Just how my experiences dictate how I perceive interactions. 🤨 We're all different with different backgrounds, so what works for me, may not be your thing, and I get that.
 
I love this. Hanlon's Razor. Intelligence has its limitations, but stupidity knows no bounds. It can be found in abundance in elected officials and bureaucratic agencies. And it is often the simplest answer as to why things went wrong (Occam's Razor and Hanlon's Razor complement one another).
 
HayesGreener said:
I love this. Hanlon's Razor. Intelligence has its limitations, but stupidity knows no bounds. It can be found in abundance in elected officials and bureaucratic agencies. And it is often the simplest answer as to why things went wrong (Occam's Razor and Hanlon's Razor complement one another).
Click to expand...
....Am not saying anything. Likely no need to? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top