The Reluctance to Embrace Radical Ideas

May 2021

Expressing skepticism about radical ideas proposed by domain experts can be risky. History shows that many groundbreaking concepts initially seemed preposterous. Dismissing ideas from knowledgeable and reasonable experts is unwise because they likely understand the implausibility but propose them anyway, suggesting they possess insights others lack.

Implausible ideas from experts are disproportionately interesting. When an average person proposes a crazy idea, it often reflects incompetence. However, when a domain expert does, it hints at potential breakthroughs. The market for ideas is efficient; the craziest ideas, if correct, have the most significant impact. Therefore, eliminating the notion of incompetence transforms implausibility from a negative to a positive indicator.

These ideas are not guaranteed to work but are good bets with high expected value. Betting on all implausible-sounding ideas from reasonable experts would likely yield net positive results. Conservatism and adherence to the current paradigm hinder the acceptance of new ideas. Even those with new ideas undervalue them initially, subjecting them to strict filters before public proposal.

The wise approach to radical ideas is to ask questions rather than dismiss them. Understanding why a smart person proposes a seemingly wrong idea can reveal gaps in one's knowledge or highlight shared pitfalls. Dismissing new ideas often stems from envy, a desire to appear sophisticated, or vested interests in existing ideas.

Paradigms shape our thinking and set high standards for new ideas. Historical examples, like Copernicus' heliocentric model, show that even revolutionary ideas faced long periods of skepticism. To foster new ideas, one must understand their initial fragility and support those who propose them. Encouraging innovators can be rewarding and enlightening.

The original article: http://paulgraham.com/newideas.html