Categories
Ideas Science and Math

Who Really Said That?

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
– Albert Einstein

We’ve all heard that quote. At meetings. In self-help books. On motivational posters in office break rooms. It exemplifies Einstein’s legendary cut-to-the-chase brilliance.

The only problem is, Einstein didn’t say it.

As far as I can tell, the quote first appeared in a Narcotics Anonymous pamphlet in the early 1980s. Einstein died in 1955 without mentioning anything remotely close to it in anything he’d ever written or said.

And yet, the misattribution stuck. Why? Because it feels like something Einstein would have said. Like Churchill, Lincoln, or Mark Twain, Einstein has become a kind of general-purpose intellectual that we can attribute our cleverest, pithiest thoughts to, whether he said them or not.

This misattribution happens all the time. So often, in fact, that there’s a name for it.

Actually, there are several.

Stigler’s Law of Eponymy

In 1980, University of Chicago statistics professor Stephen Stigler gave this phenomenon a name: Stigler’s Law of Eponymy. It states that “No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer.”1

The best part? Stigler didn’t even claim to have discovered it. He credited the idea to someone else—sociologist Robert K. Merton. In other words, the law named after Stigler was… not discovered by Stigler. The law proves itself. Here’s what he wrote in the paper:

If there is an idea in this paper that is not at least implicit in Merton’s The Sociology of Science, it is either a happy accident or a likely error. Rather I have, in the Mertonian tradition of the self-confirming hypothesis, attempted to frame the self-proving theorem.

Stigler’s Law of Eponomy

But it’s not just a clever academic joke. Stigler’s Law points to something more systemic: we don’t just forget who discovered what—we misremember it. Over time, we start attaching credit to the loudest name, not the first one.

In the original paper, Stigler and others have documented example after example:

  • Halley’s Comet? Observed by ancient Chinese and Babylonian astronomers. Halley just did the math.
  • Newton’s First Law of Motion – Better known as inertia, it was described by Galileo decades before Newton refined and popularized it.
  • Fibonacci sequence – Long before Leonardo of Pisa wrote about it, Indian mathematicians like Pingala and Virahanka had described it in the context of Sanskrit poetry and combinatorics.

Fame creates its own kind of gravity and inertia. Once someone becomes famous enough, many other discoveries are attached to them.

The Matthew Effect

Now let’s look at Robert Merton—the person Stigler credited. Back in 1968, Merton gave this bias its own name: the Matthew Effect, based on a verse in the Gospel of Matthew, “For to everyone who has, more will be given…”

In the world of science, that means prominent researchers get more recognition, more funding, more citations—even when the original insight came from someone else. It’s not always malicious. Sometimes, people just assume the famous name must be behind the breakthrough. Other times, the lesser-known researcher gets buried in the footnotes.

The Matthew Effect isn’t limited to academia. It shows up in:

  • Publishing, where established authors get bigger advances regardless of quality.
  • Tech, where investors back founders who’ve “done it before.”
  • Education, where early reading success snowballs into long-term achievement.

It’s a feedback loop. Once you’re seen as successful, you’re more likely to be treated as successful. And then the cycle repeats.

Churchillian Drift

If Stigler’s Law and the Matthew Effect explain why discoveries get mislabeled, Churchillian Drift explains why quotes get misattributed—especially to famous people like Winston Churchill.

Coined by British broadcaster and quote sleuth Nigel Rees, Churchillian Drift describes how pithy or profound lines migrate toward famous names over time. If a quote sounds wise and ancient, we give it to Confucius. If it’s cynical and funny, it goes to Mark Twain. If it’s about strategy or war, it’s Sun Tzu. And if it’s about perseverance, logic, or nobility? Einstein gets the nod.

It’s branding by attribution. The quote becomes “better” if we imagine a titan of history saying it.

So What Do We Do With This?

At the surface, it’s just cultural laziness—there are only so many “famous” people in the public’s mental Rolodex, so we assign them everything. But it’s also more subtle and damaging: it reinforces the idea that only a handful of people in history are worth listening to.

This doesn’t just happen with quotes. It happens with scientific discoveries, artistic breakthroughs, and even entire branches of mathematics. As I wrote in The Fibonacci Sequence, Brought to You by Fibonacci (and Absolutely No One Else), history often remembers the person who popularized an idea, not the person who actually created it. The result? We get a distorted picture of how progress really happens.

The next time you hear a clever quote—or a “fact” about who discovered what—you don’t have to just nod along. You can check. Quote Investigator, run by Garson O’Toole, traces famous lines back to their earliest appearances. That’s where I found the true story of the Einstein quote.

You might find that the quote in your PowerPoint isn’t from Churchill, but from an obscure 19th-century pamphlet. Or that the mathematical sequence you love owes more to India than to Fibonacci.

Finding the truth behind these attributions means going beyond the headline version of history—the one where “Einstein was smart” and “Newton discovered everything.” What you get instead is the messy, collaborative, and far more human version of how ideas actually spread.

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler%27s_law_of_eponymy ↩︎
Categories
Human Behavior Ideas Life Lessons

Skin in the Game

Making good decisions isn’t easy, especially when it’s hard to know what information to trust. In an ideal world, we could trust the information we hear from friends and from the news. But the media likes to cover the rare and shocking, not the common and routine. A plane crash halfway around the world (a highly uncommon occurance) can seem as likely as a car accident down the street. This distortion skews our perspective, creating a big gap between what we think is likely and what actually is.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb has a smart way of knowing what really matters—he calls it “Skin in the Game.” In his book by the same name, Taleb explains that people with something at stake usually offer the best information. It’s simple: when you stand to lose, you’re going to think carefully. But when you’re insulated from the consequences, it’s easy to toss around advice or make bold predictions because they sound good, not because they’re giong to work.

Categories
Human Behavior Ideas

Hacking Evolution: Fitness Faking

Animals can fake their evolutionary fitness in a number of ways. Humans do it too. While this may seem like we’re corrupting our gene pool it might not be so bad.

Categories
Ideas Product Management

The Rebirth of Honest Tea as Just Ice Tea

I used to love Honest Tea. It made me feel so good. The company was the brainchild of Barry Nalebuff and Seth Goldman. It was based on an idea that we could have healthy, great-tasting, and ethically sourced tea. They even wrote up the history of their company, Mission in a Bottle, as an engaging graphic novel.

When they were bought by Coca-Cola in 2008, I thought, “Good for Seth and Barry. They made some money, and Coca-Cola will take the company forward.” I didn’t pay attention to the company for a while, thinking that Coca-Cola was being an attentive steward to the brand. After all, Coca-Cola had the resources to expand Honest Tea’s reach and keep the company alive. That’s why I was so surprised to see the brand Just Ice Tea on the shelves looking exactly like Honest Tea. And when I looked at the back of the bottle, I saw the same message from Seth and Barry I used to see on Honest Tea.

Categories
COVID Ideas

The Future of the Hybrid Office

It’s time to go back to the office. Some of us are already there and others, like me, will be back sometime in 2021. A lot has changed since 2019. Now we all know what a fully remote workforce looks like and most of us know how to host a Zoom meeting (though it’s still surprising how many times I need to tell people to mute their phones).

In his annual letter to JP Morgan shareholders, Jamie Dimon says that he learned that “Performing jobs remotely is more successful when people know one another and already have a large body of existing work to do. It does not work as well when people don’t know one another.” I learned these lessons over years of working in hybrid environments. When I was at AIG, my entire team, including my boss and my teammates were all based in Charlotte North Carolina while I was based in New York. We learned that we needed to meet in person a few times a year to build trust and agree on what to do. These conversations were imperative to getting everyone on the same page. These were the times to have disagreements about what to focus on and what could be postponed. We left these meetings with a plan. Then we could all travel to our own locations and get our work done.

Categories
Books / Audiobooks Human Behavior Ideas Life Lessons

What a Wonderful Word

Note: You can watch the speech I gave based on this material here.

I remember the first time it happened to me. It was the first year of business school and we were working on an economics problem set. My friend Yugin had just arrived from Korea and she was correcting an answer for her economics homework.

She asked me “What’s the English word for after you erase something?”

I thought this was a philosophical question like, “What’s left of an image after you remove it?” Something like the way Robert Rauschenberg erased a drawing by William de Kooning to push the boundaries of art.

So I answered, “When you erase something there’s nothing left. You’ve erased it.”

“No, that’s not what I’m asking. Those little pink things that come off the eraser. What do you call that?”

“Hmmm … eraser shavings maybe. We don’t have a word for that in English.”

“Huh,” she said, “that’s odd. We have a word for that in Korean.”

Categories
Ideas

When it Makes Sense to Prioritize Going for Ice Cream

Focusing on the right thing is key to being successful in work and life.  If you focus on one thing, you can accomplish anything. But, as a mentor once told me, “If you have 12 apples, don’t take one bite of each.”

But figuring out what to prioritize can be tricky. At my college reunion, my friend Lutz and I were spending the day with our families. We’d jam-packed the day with great activities. As we were walking down the street, I saw a sign for Ashley’s Homemade Ice Cream.

I said, “Lutz, I’d really like to buy my family some ice cream.”

Being the logical German, he said, “Yes. That would be nice but there’s no time left in the day. We need to go hear the President of the University speak.”

“Lutz,” I said, “you have to prioritize. You can always watch the video of the President’s speech or read a transcript. But how often are you able to spend time with your family on a beautiful spring day, sitting on the college lawn eating ice cream?”

He said, “You’re right. Let’s get the ice cream.”

And it was the best decision we’d made that weekend.

Categories
Ideas Life Lessons

How to be Happy — Yale’s Most Popular Class

This year Professor Laurie Santos created Yale’s most popular class of all time. The class is titled Psychology and the Good Life but it’s really a course on how to be happy both in the short and long term. I was excited to hear that Yale was offering the course but even more excited to see that the class is available online. She expanded on the class with her Happiness Lab Podcast. While there’s little I hadn’t heard before, it did a great job of focusing me on what’s important and helped me get into the practice of being happier.

Categories
Ideas Technology

Why Do People Think That Wearing a Hoodie to Work is a Status Symbol?

I spotted a technology executive walking down the street. He used to wear expensive tailored suits. Now he’s coming to work in high-end jeans and a polo shirt. Then it hit me. Jeans and a turtleneck or jeans and a polo shirt (or really jeans and anything) is the new innovation wardrobe. On one level, it makes sense because everyone wants to dress like Steve Jobs. But when you dig a little bit deeper, using Silicon Valley clothes as a status symbol doesn’t make any sense at all. 

Categories
Ideas

How Strawberry Ice Cream Got the Short End of the Stick

In the class The Science of Well-Being, Professor Santos focuses on how we often look at our happiness not in an absolute way but by comparing ourselves to those around us. These thoughts about absolute vs. relative comparisons got me thinking about strawberry ice cream.

Whenever I eat strawberry ice cream, I think is pretty wonderful. It’s light, sweet, and just a little bit tangy. If I like strawberry ice cream so much, why am I surprised at this fact every time I eat it. I feel like I’m carrying some sort of bias against strawberry ice cream — but why?