Political contexts are poisonous, of course, in this and so many other ways, so politics should be kept as small as possible. In most contexts, however, including political ones, the solution is to give no credit for those that don’t explain, or even to assign negative credit for punditry that isn’t demonstrably more accurate than the corwd—which leads to a wonderful incentive to shut up unless you can say something more than “I think X will happen.”
And in collaborative contexts, people are happy to give credit for mostly correct thinking that assist their own, rather than attack for mistakes. We should stay in those contexts and build them out where possible—positive sum thinking is good, and destroying, or at least ignoring, negative sum contexts is often good as well.
Political contexts are poisonous, of course, in this and so many other ways, so politics should be kept as small as possible. In most contexts, however, including political ones, the solution is to give no credit for those that don’t explain, or even to assign negative credit for punditry that isn’t demonstrably more accurate than the corwd—which leads to a wonderful incentive to shut up unless you can say something more than “I think X will happen.”
And in collaborative contexts, people are happy to give credit for mostly correct thinking that assist their own, rather than attack for mistakes. We should stay in those contexts and build them out where possible—positive sum thinking is good, and destroying, or at least ignoring, negative sum contexts is often good as well.