>this guy also forgets Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Perhaps he is just not a fan of aphorisms pulled from Murphy's law themed joke books.
Though the trouble with Hanlon's law is not in its origins, rather it is that malice and stupidity are not in any regard mutually exclusive and also that people are quite adept at disguising malice as stupidity.
I do not think the benefit of Hanlon's law is intended to be predictive. It seems rather more like a commentary on how our beliefs about people tend to be self-fulfilling prophecies.
I just think it is a clumsy version of giving someone the benefit of the doubt. Is a social grace you can grant people to not look too closely at what they are doing and assume the best about them. And in moderation it is a good thing to be doing. It is definitely not a good approach to analysis of academia or government however, which is where I often see it used, usually to defend ones outlook or respective 'team'.
edit - it also makes me very suspicious about Hanlon. Maybe not the first person I would trust if they tried to play dumb.
I think it is mostly useful as a self-check for the types of people prone to paranoia. I easily develop that sort of mindset and it's been a huge help to my personal worldview.
Perhaps he is just not a fan of aphorisms pulled from Murphy's law themed joke books.
Though the trouble with Hanlon's law is not in its origins, rather it is that malice and stupidity are not in any regard mutually exclusive and also that people are quite adept at disguising malice as stupidity.