Skip Navigation
Matthew Yglesias

Matthew Yglesias - Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
More

Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress. His first book, with the working title Heads in the Sand: Iraq and the Strange Death of Liberal Internationalism, scheduled to be published next spring by John Wiley and co., deals with the Democratic Party's struggle to find a post-9/11 foreign policy, focusing primarily on the rise and (hopefully) fall of the liberal hawk movement.

Previously, he was a staff writer at The American Prospect and an Associate Editor at TPM Media, where he contributed to the group blogs Tapped and TPMCafe. His main blog, now at The Atlantic, has existed in various forms since the dark ages of the blogosphere in January 2002.

His writing has appeared in The Guardian, Slate, The New Republic, and The Washington Monthly, and he is a regular on BloggingHeads.tv and makes the occasional radio or television appearance.

Desperately out of touch with the American mainstream, Yglesias was born and raised in Manhattan and studied philosophy at Harvard where he was editor in chief of The Harvard Independent, a campus alternative weekly.

His latest writings can be found on the Matthew Yglesias blog.

The Wisdom of Socrates

By Matthew Yglesias
Sep 6 2007, 2:40 PM ET Comment

Tyler Cowen linked the other day to a study which showed that countries whose leaders have formal training in economics don't perform better economically than countries whose leaders lack such training.

There are obviously all kinds of reasons why this might be the case, but it's a reminder that, to me, the very most important attribute in a policymaker isn't to have a ton of knowledge about the issues but, rather, to understand the limits of his knowledge. If I were asked to make an important decision about a subject where I knew I didn't know what I was talking about, I would try to survey some informed people, pick out the areas of broad consensus, and try to make a decision based on the idea that the consensus points are true and the others are uncertain. This is a good, if imperfect, heuristic. By contrast, if you're asked to make decisions about some subject where you have a lot of information, you're going to be inclined to push your pet ideas, and your pet ideas are probably wrong.

This is what's so dangerous about things like Bush's notions about Iran. It's be one thing for the president to be ignorant about Iran, the Persian Gulf more generally, energy markets, etc., if he realized he was ignorant. Instead, though, he seems to have convinced himself that his ignorance is some kind of virtue, exhibiting a deeper level of strategic understanding.

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

The Global Dangers of Syria's Looming Civil War The Dangers of Syria's Looming Civil War
Why Israel Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worthwhile Why Israeli Leaders Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worth the Effort
Using the Internet as Matchmaker: The Drawbacks to Online Dating The Drawbacks to Online Dating
Red Ink and Bright Lines: Obama's Budget Placeholder Obama's Budget: Red Ink and Bright Lines
The GOP Primary Is Badly Wounding Mitt Romney The GOP Primary Is Badly Wounding Mitt Romney

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
Election 2012 Reuters Election 2012
The destination for full politics coverage, from the primaries to the White House. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Athens in Flames

Feb 13, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)