Sublime

aggregating the judgments of an equal number of people who know lots about lots of different things is most effective because the collective pool of information becomes much bigger.

Foxes beat hedgehogs on both calibration and resolution.

the more famous an expert was, the less accurate he was.

In Tetlock’s analysis, the foxes—attuned to a wide range of potential sources, willing to admit uncertainty, not devoted to an overarching theory—turned out to be significantly better at predicting future events than the more single-minded experts. The foxes were full spectrum; the hedgehogs were narrowband.

“Where wisdom once was, quantification will now be.

For superforecasters, beliefs are hypotheses to be tested, not treasures to be guarded. It

Foxes, Tetlock found, are considerably better at forecasting than hedgehogs.

“Who experts were—professional background, status, and so on—made scarcely an iota of difference,” Tetlock concludes. “Nor did what experts thought—whether they were liberals or conservatives, realists or institutionalists, optimists or pessimists.” But “[h]ow experts thought—their style of reasoning—did matter.” The critical variable turned out to