The science fiction writer and visionary H. G. Wells predicted that in a modern technological society, statistical thinking will be as necessary for efficient citizenship as the ability to read and write. How far have we come, some hundred years later?

Many experts have concluded that people are basically incompetent when it comes to risk and need continuous “nudging”. A glance into the psychological literature reveals a shocking list of fallacies in statistical thinking, which are often attributed to problems inside our minds. Against this pessimistic view, Gerd Gigerenzer maintains that the problem is not simply internal but lies in the external representation of information. Every piece of statistical information requires a representation, that is, a form. Some forms tend to cloud minds, while others foster insight. The widespread innumeracy among experts, citizens, journalists, and politicians alike who do not understand what statistical evidence means, or even consistently draw wrong conclusions without noticing, is caused to a significant degree by their reliance on obscure representations.

Schools tend to teach reading and writing, but not how to deal with the risks of a modern technological world. Yet everyone can learn to deal with risk and uncertainty. A democracy needs risk-savvy citizens who cannot be easily frightened into surrendering their money, their welfare, and their liberty. Asking critical questions can also shape the emotional climate in a society so that hopes and anxieties are no longer as easily manipulated from outside and citizens can develop an informed and more relaxed attitude towards health, money, and other critical things.