Phil Tetlock and Dan Gardner on “Better Learning Through Better Betting”

Posted on Posted in Publications

“Ideally, a bet would use a question as big as the debate it means to settle. But that will not work, because big questions – “Will population growth outstrip resources and threaten civilization?” – do not produce easily measurable outcomes. The key, instead, is to ask many small, precise questions…. This approach, using question clusters, could be applied to virtually any important debate. Right now, for example we are putting the hawks-versus-doves argument about the Iran nuclear deal to the forecasting test.

“Naturally, using many questions could result in split decisions. But if our goal is to learn, that is a feature, not a bug. A split decision would suggest that neither bettor’s understanding of reality is perfectly accurate and that the truth lies somewhere between. That would be an enlightening result particularly when public debates are dominated by extreme positions.”

Phil Tetlock and Dan Gardner, May 11, 2016, Project Syndicate

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

One thought on “Phil Tetlock and Dan Gardner on “Better Learning Through Better Betting”

  1. Congrats on the loss. Pl17#au&e82at;s happen but if you keep at it you’ll get things moving again. I ran into a plateau right from the start but if I keep at it I’ll break the stall and start losing something besides water.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *