In this week's Frankly, Nate considers the ways in which our social species overvalues false-confidence rather than the more honest and inquisitive response of "I don't know." He invites us to consider the science behind this cultural bias towards certainty: from our biological response from the ...
In this week's Frankly, Nate considers the ways in which our social species overvalues false-confidence rather than the more honest and inquisitive response of "I don't know." He invites us to consider the science behind this cultural bias towards certainty: from our biological response from the stress of "not knowing" to the reinforcing effects of motivated reasoning that ensnares even the smartest among us (especially the smartest among us).
Overconfidence and the desire for quick answers have been the root cause of many of humanity's disasters, from the space shuttle Challenger explosion to the Deep Water Horizon oil spill to the subprime housing bubble. And now, the exponential growth and integration of Artificial Intelligence is hyper-fueling this risk, as AI mirrors the human aversion to uncertainty through "hallucinations". As some AI companies are now considering penalizing over-confident answers in favor of "I don't know", perhaps humans could learn to do the same for ourselves.
How often do you say. "I don't know"? In what ways do we lose opportunities for conversation and exploration by not admitting our own uncertainties? Can listening to our own gut for "truth" and embracing intentional Red Team dissent shift "I don't know" from weakness to wisdom?
(Recorded October 17th, 2025)
Show Notes and More
Watch this video episode on YouTube
Want to learn the broad overview of The Great Simplification in 30 minutes? Watch our Animated Movie.
---
Support The Institute for the Study of Energy and Our Future
Join our Substack newsletter
Join our Hylo channel and connect with other listeners