A Biased Explanation of Foxes and Hedgehogs

How Foxes Think

Multidisciplinary: Incorporate ideas from different disciplines and regardless of their origin on the political spectrum.

Adaptable: Find a new approach—or pursue multiple approaches at the same time—if they aren’t sure the original one is working.

Self-critical: Sometimes willing (if rarely happy) to acknowledge mistakes in their predictions and accept the blame for them.

Tolerant of complexity: See the universe as complicated, perhaps to the point of many fundamental problems being irresolvable or inherently unpredictable.

Cautious: Express their predictions in probabilistic terms and qualify their opinions.

Empirical: Rely more on observation than theory.

Foxes are better forecasters.

How Hedgehogs Think

Specialized: Often have spent the bulk of their careers on one or two great problems. May view the opinions of “outsiders” skeptically.

Stalwart: Stick to the same “all-in” approach—new data is used to refine the original model.

Stubborn: Mistakes are blamed on bad luck or on idiosyncratic circumstances—a good model had a bad day.

Order-seeking: Expect that the world will be found to abide by relatively simple governing relationships once the signal is identified through the noise.

Confident: Rarely hedge their predictions and are reluctant to change them.

Ideological: Expect that solutions to many day-to-day problems are manifestations of some grander theory or struggle.

Hedgehogs are weaker forecasters.

Nate Silver provides a very negative portrayal of those who think like hedgehogs, settling down in one field of expertise, compared to those who think like foxes, darting from field to field.