Not Being Mind Readers, There Are Things We Cannot Know

We need cognitive tests because we cannot read people’s minds. Instead, we have to find evidence that supports various inferences we might want to make—or that refutes them. This dilemma of not being able to read minds is not limited to testing.

Hanlon’s Razor

Hanlon’s Razor advises, “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” But the idea goes back much further. In the 19th century, H. G. Wells wrote, “There is very little deliberate wickedness in the world. The stupidity of our selfishness gives much the same results indeed, but in the ethical laboratory it shows a different nature.”

In my teen years, I thought that the worst trait a person could have was incompetence. Nope, I’ve never been fun at parties. I certainly have that history of seeing incompetence around me. But for the last few years, I have been faced with a situation outside of my professional life that I attribute to malice. Others whom I respect agree, but temper it with judgment of some amount of incompetence. Certainly, many people seem quite unwilling to see this particular form of malice.

How can I know? How can any of us know? We cannot see inside the hearts and minds of those around us, not even that one woman.

Optimizing political Strategy

In the days immediately after Joe Biden’s disastrous debate performance in his 2024 debate with Donald Trump, I cautioned those around me that it would be foolish for Biden to drop out of the race before the RNC nominating convention. There would be no way to take away coverage from the RNC, and it would be wise to let Trump’s Republican Party waste its powder on attacks on Joe Biden and his age when they had maximum free coverage by the news media.

I cautioned that no one is going to remember a few weeks in July when we actually get to November. The DNC nominating convention was still over a month away, and there was not much in July or August that would matter by Election Day. Electoral campaign memories are short, perhaps unfortunately short.

I said that the optimal strategy would be to wait until…July 19 or 20 for Biden to drop out of the race. That would be weeks before the the Democrats officially nominated their candidate. I didn’t want a traditional circular firing squad, and thought the best strategy would be to go with Kamala Harris—though she was not my preferred candidate in 2020.

Obviously, for this bait and switch strategy to work, there could not be leaks. Anyone who might leak anything to the media had to be ignorant of the plan. Thus, people in the know could not tell their aides—or perhaps even their spouses. For this to work, Joe Biden would have to look stubborn—even as the pressure mounted from people who did not know the plan

I did not anticipate that Biden’s delay would build up such energy for replacement that a politician who produced so little excitement in 2019 and 2020 would be as well received as Vice President Harris’s candidacy has been. And I thought that Navel veteran and Rhodes Scholar, obviously conservative family man who is comfortable debating Republicans on FOX news Pete Buttigieg would be a great running mate for her.

In fact, I was off by a day. President Biden dropped out of the 2024 presidential race on July 21. But otherwise…was my prediction wrong?

How can I know? How can anyone know? This had to be a no leaks plan. It would require Biden to look like an old grandfather who absolutely refuses to give up his car keys. He would have to take the further reputational hit in order to help his party to retain the White House.

What were Joe Biden and his closest most trusted advisors thinking? Could the greatest political strategist of this century, Nancy Pelosi, have come up with this weeks ago? Could President Biden have gathered the Clintons, Obamas and her for a serious strategy session? (Not Chuck Schumer. I do not trust that he would not leak.)

How could we possible know the truth? Even if word leaked in the months or years ahead that this was planned, why should we trust that? It would make Democratic leadership look brilliant, so there is real motivation to leak such claims after Republicans cannot do anything about it. I do not know what to conclude, and I do not know that I ever will. (Even I do not think that the plan—the conspiracy—could go further back than the debate, but how can I be sure…?)

I cannot read anyone’s mind.

The Challenge of Intellectual Humilty

I really try to be intellectual humble. I try to be aware of what I think and why. I try to be conscious of what I really know and the absolute facts available to me. I try to be mindful of when I run up the ladder of inference, even if it is just a single rung.

Yes, it would be validating for me to conclude that that woman is motivated by malice, rather than just stupid. Yes, it would be satisfying to me to think that our political leaders are brilliant, rather than just bumbling.

But I cannot read minds. I need to live with that uncertainty. At the same time, I need to look for whatever confirming and disconfirming evidence might be available—both professionally and in the other spheres of my life.