Hanlon’s razor

Hanlon’s razor, adage attributed to American writer Robert J. Hanlon that states, “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” As a heuristic reasoning tool, the statement is a reminder to give others the benefit of the doubt by considering alternative explanations for their actions rather than assuming that they intend harm. For example, if someone does not receive a response from their close friend after sending their friend a text, that person might assume that their friend is upset with them and intentionally not responding. In reality, the friend’s cell phone battery may have died, and the friend might not have had time to recharge it.

History

Hanlon submitted his personal “law” to the publishers of Murphy’s Law, Book Two: More Reasons Why Things Go Wrong (1980), written by American author Arthur Bloch. When the book was published, Hanlon’s entry was included and credited to him. In 1990 Hanlon’s razor was published in a glossary of slang terms for computer programmers called the Jargon File. Programmers used the adage as a reminder that many problems were the result of honest mistakes rather than purposeful sabotage.

The underlying principle of Hanlon’s razor has been shared in various forms throughout history. For example, Occam’s razor, which dates to the 14th century, is written in Latin as pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, or “plurality should not be posited without necessity” (i.e., of two competing theories, the simpler theory should be preferred).

Discover how ordinary objects work, and expand your understanding of the familiar.

SIGN UP

" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">

Thank you for signing up!"

Back to homepage

By clicking "Sign Up", you consent to the Britannica Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Another example of the principle underlying Hanlon’s razor appeared in Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s 1774 novel The Sorrows of Young Werther, where he wrote, “Misunderstandings and neglect occasion more mischief in the world than even malice and wickedness. At all events, the two latter are of less frequent occurrence.” In the novella Logic of Empire (1941), Robert. A Heinlein wrote, “You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.” In Heinlein’s later novel Time Enough for Love (1973), he wrote, “Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.”

In the 21st century management consultant Douglas W. Hubbard adapted the saying for its use in the context of consulting, explaining it in his book The Failure of Risk Management: Why It’s Broken and How to Fix It (2009). Hubbard stated, “Never attribute to malice or stupidity that which can be explained by moderately rational individuals following incentives in a complex system of interactions.”

Limitations

Hanlon’s razor is a heuristic, so it must be applied cautiously to different scenarios. Sometimes people do act with malicious intent. While such instances may be relatively uncommon, they should be considered before the rule is applied. Additionally, the use of Hanlon’s razor does not relate to whether or not a particular action is acceptable simply because it occurred due to an individual’s stupidity. The shortcut merely encourages people to consider the most likely explanation for an event so that they may determine whether it is acceptable and respond accordingly.

Benefits

Hanlon’s razor helps people to avoid the negative emotions they may experience when assuming that someone has acted out of malice and can also prevent them from acting hastily as a result. By applying Hanlon’s razor and giving others the benefit of the doubt, interpersonal relationships can be strengthened.

Explore Britannica Premium!

The trusted destination for professionals, college students, and lifelong learners.

SUBSCRIBE

Hanlon’s razor is effective at combating cognitive biases. Such biases include:

• Fundamental attribution error: the tendency to overemphasize the influence of personality and ignore situational factors when interpreting others’ actions
• Egocentric bias: the tendency to rely on one’s own perspective when interpreting others’ actions
• Empathy gap: a bias that keeps people from considering people’s mental states when attempting to understand their actions
• Curse of knowledge: a bias in which people fail to account for the fact that others may not have knowledge about the same things as them
• Confirmation bias: the tendency to seek proof that supports one’s beliefs and to dismiss anything that contradicts such beliefs