He [Tetlock] is trying to replace the public debates he describes as “Krugman-Ferguson pie fights” — a reference to the clashes over austerity between the economist and Nobel laureate, Paul Krugman and the economic historian, Niall Ferguson — with adversarial collaboration. “You give each side the opportunity to pose, say, 10 questions it thinks are probative and resolvable, and that it thinks it has a comparative advantage in answering” and then have the two sides give testable answers . . . Here is a very clear psychological prediction: people will come out of that tournament more open-minded than they otherwise would have been. You can take that one to the bank.”That is a very clever model. Given that most proposals are based on unprovable beliefs that are mistaken as demonstrable truth, this approach would clear the argument terrain very quickly.
I also really like the single line -
There is a price to be paid for feeling good about your beliefs.Regrettably, authoritarians always try to off-load the price onto those least able to pay. Given that the policies that make the elite feel good also tend to have very high costs, low or non-existent benefits and high unintended consequences, this is especially tragic.