The hedgehog and the Fox:
Hedgehogs “know one big thing” and have a theory about the world; they account for particular events within a coherent framework, bristle with impatience toward those who don’t see things their way, and are confident in their forecasts. They are also especially reluctant to admit error. For hedgehogs, a failed prediction is almost always “off only on timing” or “very nearly right”. They are opinionated and clear, which is exactly what television producers love to see on programs. Two hedgehogs on different sides of an issue, each attacking the idiotic ideas of the adversary, make for a good show.
Foxes, by contrast, are complex thinkers. They don’t believe that one big thing drives the march of history (for example they are unlikely to accept the view that Ronald Reagan single-handedly ended the cold war by standing tall against the Soviet Union). Instead the foxes recognize that reality emerges from interactions of many different agents and forces, including blind luck, often producing large and unpredictable outcomes.
The metaphor comes from an essay by Isaiah Berlin, who in turn got it from an ancient Greek poet. You’re right that the metaphor doesn’t match our animal stereotypes, but it has become pretty entrenched.
Agree the animal metaphor doesn’t help very well. I have some stereotype for fox (cunningness, slyness, trickster etc...), but draw a blank for hedgehog.
As to whether the dichotomy is real, well I think it’s a useful model to question one’s judgement. A better question would be is it more useful than say “system1 vs system2 ” model (or pick another model.).
The hedgehog and the Fox: Hedgehogs “know one big thing” and have a theory about the world; they account for particular events within a coherent framework, bristle with impatience toward those who don’t see things their way, and are confident in their forecasts. They are also especially reluctant to admit error. For hedgehogs, a failed prediction is almost always “off only on timing” or “very nearly right”. They are opinionated and clear, which is exactly what television producers love to see on programs. Two hedgehogs on different sides of an issue, each attacking the idiotic ideas of the adversary, make for a good show. Foxes, by contrast, are complex thinkers. They don’t believe that one big thing drives the march of history (for example they are unlikely to accept the view that Ronald Reagan single-handedly ended the cold war by standing tall against the Soviet Union). Instead the foxes recognize that reality emerges from interactions of many different agents and forces, including blind luck, often producing large and unpredictable outcomes.
~ Daniel Kahneman (Thinking, fast and slow)
Fox News: brought to you by a bunch of Hedgehogs.
All TV reporting is hedgehog-style: nuance is too confusing for the common people.
Woosh
Is the animal metaphor helpful? I don’t think of either stereotype when I hear “fox” or “hedgehog”. For that matter, is the dichotomy real?
The metaphor comes from an essay by Isaiah Berlin, who in turn got it from an ancient Greek poet. You’re right that the metaphor doesn’t match our animal stereotypes, but it has become pretty entrenched.
Agree the animal metaphor doesn’t help very well. I have some stereotype for fox (cunningness, slyness, trickster etc...), but draw a blank for hedgehog.
As to whether the dichotomy is real, well I think it’s a useful model to question one’s judgement. A better question would be is it more useful than say “system1 vs system2 ” model (or pick another model.).