Today, there are approximately 8 billion people alive, with an estimated 110 billion ever having been born. While these numbers are fascinating on their own, they also offer valuable insights when viewed through the lens of probabilities and statistics.
Consider this: if today an event has a one-in-a-billion chance of happening to someone in 2025, that event will actually occur eight times this year. If that event has a one-in-a-million chance of happening each day, it will affect 2.9 million people this year. A one-in-a-trillion daily event will occur 125 times in 2025. This is the essence of probabilities—detached, factual, and often counterintuitive. Despite the clarity of statistical reasoning, human psychology makes it difficult for us to process large numbers and assess risk accurately. There are three key reasons for this:
1. Difficulty Comprehending Large and Small Numbers
Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman noted:
"Human beings cannot comprehend very large or very small numbers. It would be useful for us to acknowledge that fact."
We tend to overestimate rare but dangerous events while underestimating positive outcomes. For example, many people fear plane crashes more than car accidents, despite the latter being far more common and deadly. Similarly, we often overlook significant reductions in deaths from natural disasters due to advancements in preparedness and prevention and imagine we are more at risk today than in earlier times.
2. The Negativity Bias and Evolutionary Survival
Our natural tendency to be risk-averse is a survival mechanism. Historically, avoiding danger was crucial for survival, as infectious diseases, accidents, and predation posed significant threats.
For example, in 1900, approximately 800 per 100,000 Americans died annually from infectious diseases. By 2014, this number had dropped to just 46 per 100,000—a staggering 94% decline.*
Yet, our instinctual caution remains hardwired, often making us perceive the world as more dangerous than it actually is.
3. Media Amplification of Rare Events
The third problem is the over reporting of very low-frequency events. Until very recently (1950s), most news reporting was largely about local matters, with some regional and national events noted and almost none of an international nature. As the number of people in your “news” community was likely less than a few million, an event with a one-in-a-billion occurrence in your community was unlikely to happen, so you would never know if it had transpired elsewhere and would not imagine the possibility of such an occurrence. Since "if it bleeds, it leads," people are constantly exposed to extraordinary tragic but infrequent events, distorting their perception of risk. This creates a false impression that such events are far more common than they actually are, increasing fear and anxiety about the world.
A More Rational Approach to Risk
Understanding probability allows us to adopt a more balanced perspective on risk. While it is natural to feel cautious, recognizing that the world is statistically safer than ever can help reduce unnecessary fear. By focusing on data rather than emotion, we can make better decisions and embrace a more confident outlook on life.
So, the next time you hear about a rare but dramatic event, ask yourself: Is this truly a rising threat or just a reflection of our growing access to information or more likely situation that with eight billion people alive having eight billion daily experience that eight -in-a-billion event occurred today?
Letting go of exaggerated fears can empower you to experience the world with greater clarity, freedom and JOY
*Source: "Same as Ever: Timeless Lessons on Risk, Opportunity, and Living a Good Life" by Morgan Housel. Well worth a read, full of commonsense in the battle against nonsense.