{"id":1094,"date":"2008-03-31T15:37:37","date_gmt":"2008-03-31T23:37:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/glenandpaula.com\/wordpress\/?p=1094"},"modified":"2009-06-27T07:32:15","modified_gmt":"2009-06-27T15:32:15","slug":"notes-from-the-black-swan-by-nassim-taleb","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/glenandpaula.com\/wordpress\/archives\/2008\/03\/31\/notes-from-the-black-swan-by-nassim-taleb","title":{"rendered":"Notes from The Black Swan by Nassim Taleb"},"content":{"rendered":"

I just fin\u00adished read\u00ading The Black Swan: The Impact of the High\u00adly Improb\u00ada\u00adble<\/a> by Nas\u00adsim Taleb<\/a> <\/p>\n

down\u00adload straw dogs dvdrip<\/a><\/p>\n

down\u00adload prophe\u00adcy the movie<\/a><\/u> . It\u2019s a fun read, and I think some of the things I learned from it will help me to illus\u00adtrate Eccle\u00adsi\u00adastes when we start preach\u00ading through it in a few weeks.<\/p>\n

Any\u00adway, here are some snip\u00adpets I thought were worth hold\u00ading on to. Hope they are as use\u00adful to you as I think they will be to me.<\/p>\n

The writer Umber\u00adto Eco belongs to that small class of schol\u00adars who are ency\u00adclo\u00adpe\u00addic, insight\u00adful, and non\u00addull. He is the own\u00ader of a large per\u00adson\u00adal library (con\u00adtain\u00ading thir\u00adty thou\u00adsand books), and sep\u00ada\u00adrates vis\u00adi\u00adtors into two cat\u00ade\u00adgories: those who react with \u201cWow! Sig\u00adnore pro\u00adfes\u00adsore dot\u00adtore Eco, what a library you have! How many of these books have you read?\u201d and the oth\u00aders \u2013 a very small minor\u00adi\u00adty \u2013 who get the point that a pri\u00advate library is not an ego-boost\u00ading appendage but a research tool. Read books are far less valu\u00adable than unread ones. The library should con\u00adtain as much of what you do not know as your finan\u00adcial means, mort\u00adgage rates, and the cur\u00adrent\u00adly tight real-estate mar\u00adket allow you to put there. Page 1<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Now if only I could con\u00advince Paula that this is the right way to think about book acqui\u00adsi\u00adtions\u2026<\/p>\n

It was a few years after the begin\u00adning of the Lebanese war, as I was attend\u00ading the Whar\u00adton School, at the age of twen\u00adty-two, that I was hit with the idea of effi\u00adcient mar\u00adkets \u2013 and idea that holds that there is no way to derive prof\u00adits from trad\u00aded secu\u00adri\u00adties since these instru\u00adments have auto\u00admat\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly incor\u00adpo\u00adrat\u00aded all the avail\u00adable infor\u00adma\u00adtion. Pub\u00adlic infor\u00adma\u00adtion can there\u00adfore be use\u00adless, par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar\u00adly to a busi\u00adness\u00adman, since prices can already \u201cinclude\u201d all such infor\u00adma\u00adtion, and news shared with mil\u00adlions gives you no real advan\u00adtage. Odds are that one or more of the hun\u00addreds of mil\u00adlions of oth\u00ader read\u00aders of such infor\u00adma\u00adtion will already have bought the secu\u00adri\u00adty, thus push\u00ading up the price. I then com\u00adplete\u00adly gave up read\u00ading news\u00adpa\u00adpers and watch\u00ading tele\u00advi\u00adsion, which freed up a con\u00adsid\u00ader\u00adable amount of time (say one hour or more per day, enough time to read more than a hun\u00addred addi\u00adtion\u00adal books per years, which, after a cou\u00adple of decades, starts mount\u00ading). Page 17<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I\u2019ve been struck late\u00adly by the num\u00adber of peo\u00adple I respect who advise us against read\u00ading the news\u00adpa\u00adper on the grounds that it makes you more stu\u00adpid about things that mat\u00adter. I even stum\u00adbled across a com\u00adpi\u00adla\u00adtion of quotes against news<\/a> today.<\/p>\n

In the arts \u2013 say the cin\u00ade\u00adma \u2013 things are far more vicious. What we call \u201ctal\u00adent\u201d gen\u00ader\u00adal\u00adly comes from suc\u00adcess, rather than its oppo\u00adsite. A great deal of empiri\u00adcism has been done on the sub\u00adject, most notably by Art De Vany, an insight\u00adful and orig\u00adi\u00adnal thinker who sin\u00adgle\u00admind\u00aded\u00adly stud\u00adied wild uncer\u00adtain\u00adty in the movies. He showed that, sad\u00adly, much of what we ascribe to skills is an after-the-fact attri\u00adbu\u00adtion. The movie makes the actor, he claims \u2013 and a large dose of non\u00adlin\u00adear luck makes the movie. Page 31 (he foot\u00adnotes Arthur De Vany Hol\u00adly\u00adwood Eco\u00adnom\u00adics: Chaos in the Music Indus\u00adtry 2002)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I sus\u00adpect the same thing is true of megachurch\u00ades. Don\u2019t mis\u00adun\u00adder\u00adstand me \u2014 there is a high lev\u00adel of skill involved in build\u00ading an orga\u00adni\u00adza\u00adtion like that. But look\u00ading around at min\u00adis\u00adters I know, many more peo\u00adple seem to have the skills than have the megachurch to go with it. In oth\u00ader words, there are peo\u00adple out there as skilled as Ed Young<\/a> <\/p>\n

tal\u00adent\u00aded mr rip\u00adley the free<\/a><\/div>\n

that the world will nev\u00ader know. I don\u2019t think I\u2019m one of them, mind, but I know that they\u2019re out there. I\u2019ve met them.<\/p>\n

Indeed, it is not a well-known fact that the most com\u00adplete expo\u00adsi\u00adtion of the ideas of skep\u00adti\u00adcism, until recent\u00adly, remains the work of a pow\u00ader\u00adful Catholic bish\u00adop who was an august mem\u00adber of the French Acad\u00ade\u00admy. Pierre-Daniel Huet wrote his Philo\u00adsoph\u00adi\u00adcal Trea\u00adtise on the Weak\u00adness of the Human Mind in 1690, a remark\u00adably book that tears through dog\u00admas and ques\u00adtions human per\u00adcep\u00adtion. Huet presents argu\u00adments against causal\u00adi\u00adty that are quite potent \u2013 he states, for instance, that any event can have an infin\u00adi\u00adty of pos\u00adsi\u00adble caus\u00ades. Page 49<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Inter\u00adest\u00ading. You can read more about Huet on Wikipedia<\/a> <\/p>\n

down\u00adload hard way the dvd<\/a><\/div>\n

.<\/p>\n

In a famous argu\u00adment, the logi\u00adcian W. V. Quine showed that there exist fam\u00adi\u00adlies of log\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly con\u00adsis\u00adtent inter\u00adpre\u00adta\u00adtions and the\u00ado\u00adries that can match a giv\u00aden series of facts. Page 72<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

You can learn more about Quine on Wikipedia<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Indeed, peo\u00adple tend to fool them\u00adselves with their self-nar\u00adra\u00adtive of \u201cnation\u00adal iden\u00adti\u00adty,\u201d which, in a break\u00adthrough paper in Sci\u00adence by six\u00adty-five authors, was shown to be a total fic\u00adtion. (\u201cNation\u00adal traits\u201d might be great for movies, they might help a lot with war, but they are Pla\u00adton\u00adic notions that car\u00adry no empir\u00adi\u00adcal validity\u2014yet, for exam\u00adple, both the Eng\u00adlish and the non-Eng\u00adlish erro\u00adneous\u00adly believe in an Eng\u00adlish \u201cnation\u00adal tem\u00adpera\u00adment.\u201d) Empir\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly, sex, social class, and pro\u00adfes\u00adsion seem to be bet\u00adter pre\u00addic\u00adtors of someone\u2019s behav\u00adior than nation\u00adal\u00adi\u00adty (a male from Swe\u00adden resem\u00adbles a male from Togo more than a female from Swe\u00adden; a philoso\u00adpher from Peru resem\u00adbles a philoso\u00adpher from Scot\u00adland more than a jan\u00adi\u00adtor from Peru; and so on). Page 74\u201375<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And yet the French remain\u2026 \ud83d\ude42 Seri\u00adous\u00adly, this reminds me of bone I have to pick with per\u00adson\u00adal\u00adi\u00adty test\u00ading, name\u00adly that it is com\u00adplete and utter bunk. Dif\u00adfer\u00adent peo\u00adple have dif\u00adfer\u00adent ranges of tem\u00adpera\u00adment, sure, but the tools we use to mea\u00adsure those vari\u00adances are ridicu\u00adlous.<\/p>\n

[Giv\u00aden that the nar\u00adra\u00adtive fal\u00adla\u00adcy is so mis\u00adlead\u00ading, we should remem\u00adber that] Only a dia\u00admond can cut a dia\u00admond; we can use our abil\u00adi\u00adty to con\u00advince with a sto\u00adry that con\u00adveys the right message\u2014what sto\u00adry\u00adtellers seem to do. Page 84<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Good reminder for ser\u00admons \u2014 there are times that all the data in the world will lack the impact of a sin\u00adgle com\u00adpelling sto\u00adry.<\/p>\n

The researcher Thomas Aste\u00adbro has shown that returns on inde\u00adpen\u00addent inven\u00adtions (you take the ceme\u00adtery into account) are far low\u00ader than those on ven\u00adture cap\u00adi\u00adtal. Some blind\u00adness to the odds\u2026 is nec\u00ades\u00adsary for entre\u00adpre\u00adneurs to func\u00adtion. The ven\u00adture cap\u00adi\u00adtal\u00adist is the one who gets the shekels. The econ\u00ado\u00admist William Bau\u00admol calls this \u201ca touch of mad\u00adness.\u201d This may indeed apply to all con\u00adcen\u00adtrat\u00aded busi\u00adness\u00ades: when you look at the empir\u00adi\u00adcal record, you not only see that ven\u00adture cap\u00adi\u00adtal\u00adists do bet\u00adter than entre\u00adpre\u00adneurs, but pub\u00adlish\u00aders do bet\u00adter than writ\u00aders, deal\u00aders do bet\u00adter than artists, and sci\u00adence does bet\u00adter than sci\u00aden\u00adtists (about 50 per\u00adcent of sci\u00aden\u00adtif\u00adic and schol\u00adar\u00adly papers, cost\u00ading months, some\u00adtimes years of effort, are nev\u00ader tru\u00adly read). Page 90<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And gov\u00adern\u00adments do bet\u00adter than tax\u00adpay\u00aders. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n

Pre\u00addic\u00adtion, not nar\u00adra\u00adtion, is the real test of our under\u00adstand\u00ading of the world. Page 133<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

True dat.<\/p>\n

For many peo\u00adple, knowl\u00adedge has the remark\u00adable pow\u00ader of pro\u00adduc\u00ading con\u00adfi\u00addence instead of mea\u00adsur\u00adable apti\u00adtude. Page 135<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Trag\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly true dat.<\/p>\n

Show two groups of peo\u00adple a blur\u00adry image of a fire hydrant, blur\u00adry enough for them not to rec\u00adog\u00adnize what it is. For one group, increase the res\u00ado\u00adlu\u00adtion slow\u00adly, in ten steps. For the sec\u00adond, do it faster, in five steps. Stop at a point were both groups have pre\u00adsent\u00aded an iden\u00adti\u00adcal image and ask each of them to iden\u00adti\u00adfy what they see. The mem\u00adbers of the group that saw few\u00ader inter\u00adme\u00addi\u00adate steps are like\u00adly to rec\u00adog\u00adnize the hydrant much quick\u00ader. Moral? The more infor\u00adma\u00adtion you give some\u00adone, the more hypothe\u00adses they will for\u00admu\u00adlate along the way, and the worse-off they will be. They see more ran\u00addom noise and mis\u00adtake it for infor\u00adma\u00adtion. Page 144<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Com\u00adbine that with this next one\u2026<\/p>\n

\u2026in anoth\u00ader telling exper\u00adi\u00adment, the psy\u00adchol\u00ado\u00adgist Paul Slovic asked book\u00admak\u00aders to select from eighty-eight vari\u00adables in past horse races those that they found use\u00adful in com\u00adput\u00ading the odds. These vari\u00adables includ\u00aded all man\u00adner of sta\u00adtis\u00adti\u00adcal infor\u00adma\u00adtion about past per\u00adfor\u00admances. The book\u00admark\u00aders were giv\u00aden the ten most use\u00adful vari\u00adables, then asked to pre\u00addict the out\u00adcomes of races. Then they were giv\u00aden ten more and asked to pre\u00addict again. The increase in the infor\u00adma\u00adtion set did not lead to an increase in their accu\u00adra\u00adcy; their con\u00adfi\u00addence in their choic\u00ades, on the oth\u00ader hand, went up marked\u00adly. Infor\u00adma\u00adtion proved to be tox\u00adic. Page 145<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So if you\u2019re addict\u00aded to sta\u00adtis\u00adtics, lay off! Espe\u00adcial\u00adly if you\u2019re track\u00ading every nuance of your week\u00adly atten\u00addance or the hour-by-hour views of your most recent Face\u00adbook ad.<\/p>\n

Eco\u00adnom\u00adics is the most insu\u00adlar of fields; it is the one that quotes least from out\u00adside itself! Page 155<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I did\u00adn\u2019t see a foot\u00adnote for this claim, but it amus\u00ades me to believe that it\u2019s true. <\/p>\n

Researchers have test\u00aded how stu\u00addents esti\u00admate the time need\u00aded to com\u00adplete their projects. In one rep\u00adre\u00adsen\u00adta\u00adtive test, they broke a group into two vari\u00adeties, opti\u00admistic and pes\u00adsimistic. Opti\u00admistic stu\u00addents promised twen\u00adty-six days; the pes\u00adsimistic ones forty-sev\u00aden days. The aver\u00adage actu\u00adal time to com\u00adple\u00adtion turned out to be fifty-six days. Page 157<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Read it and weep, stu\u00addents. Read it and weep.<\/p>\n

[Unlike bio\u00adlog\u00adi\u00adcal vari\u00adables such as age, human ven\u00adtures exhib\u00adit a total\u00adly dif\u00adfer\u00adent sched\u00adule] Let\u2019s say a project is expect\u00aded to ter\u00admi\u00adnate in 79 days\u2026. On the 79th day, if the project is not fin\u00adished, it will be expect\u00aded to take anoth\u00ader 25 days to com\u00adplete. But on the 90th day, if the project is still not com\u00adplet\u00aded, it should have about 58 days to go. On the 100th, it will have 89 days to go. On the 119th, it should have an extra 149 days. On day 600, if the project is not done, you will be expect\u00aded to need an extra 1,590 days. As you see, the longer you wait, the longer you will be expect\u00aded to wait. Page 159<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Eep. Based on this log\u00adic, my office will be final\u00adly and ful\u00adly cleaned some\u00adtime around 3,000 A.D.<\/p>\n

At New York\u2019s JFK air\u00adport you can find gigan\u00adtic news\u00adstands with walls full of mag\u00ada\u00adzines. They are usu\u00adal\u00adly manned by a very polite fam\u00adi\u00adly from the Indi\u00adan sub\u00adcon\u00adti\u00adnent (just the par\u00adents; the chil\u00addren are in med\u00adical school). These walls present you with the entire cor\u00adpus of what an \u201cinformed\u201d per\u00adson needs in order \u201cto know what is going on.\u201d I won\u00adder how long it would take to read every sin\u00adgle one of these mag\u00ada\u00adzines, exclud\u00ading the fish\u00ading and motor\u00adcy\u00adcle peri\u00adod\u00adi\u00adcals (but includ\u00ading the gos\u00adsip magazines\u2014you might as well have some fun). Half a life\u00adtime? An entire life\u00adtime?
\n\tSad\u00adly, all this knowl\u00adedge would not help the read\u00ader to fore\u00adcast what is to hap\u00adpen tomor\u00adrow. Actu\u00adal\u00adly, it might decrease his abil\u00adi\u00adty to fore\u00adcast. Page 163\u2013164<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He not only knocks news\u00adpa\u00adpers, he knocks mag\u00ada\u00adzines as well. What\u2019s next, blogs? \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n

In 1965 two radio astronomers at Bell Labs in New Jer\u00adsey who were mount\u00ading a large anten\u00adna were both\u00adered by a back\u00adground noise, a hiss, like the sta\u00adt\u00adic that you hear when you have bad recep\u00adtion. The noise could not be eradicated\u2014even after they cleaned the bird excre\u00adment out of the dish, since they were con\u00advinced that bird poop was behind the noise. It took a while for them to fig\u00adure out that what they were hear\u00ading was the trace of the birth of the uni\u00adverse, the cos\u00admic back\u00adground microwave radi\u00ada\u00adtion. Page 168<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

They made an impor\u00adtant dis\u00adcov\u00adery about the very nature of the uni\u00adverse while look\u00ading for bird poop! Don\u2019t wait for the great moment. The event (con\u00adver\u00adsa\u00adtion, ser\u00admon, insight) that changes your min\u00adistry for\u00adev\u00ader will like\u00adly come at the most unex\u00adpect\u00aded moment, and it prob\u00ada\u00adbly won\u2019t hap\u00adpen in the lime\u00adlight. Get out there and clean some bird poop, and be atten\u00adtive to your sur\u00adround\u00adings while you do it.<\/p>\n

[How hard can long-range pre\u00addic\u00adtion be?] I use the exam\u00adple as com\u00adput\u00aded by the math\u00ade\u00admati\u00adcian Michael Berry. If you know a set of basic para\u00adme\u00adters con\u00adcern\u00ading [a bil\u00adliard] ball at rest, can com\u00adpute the resis\u00adtance of the table (quite ele\u00admen\u00adtary), and can gauge the strength of the impact, then it is rather easy to pre\u00addict what would hap\u00adpen at the first hit. The sec\u00adond impact becomes more com\u00adpli\u00adcat\u00aded, but pos\u00adsi\u00adble; you need to be more care\u00adful about your knowl\u00adedge of the ini\u00adtial states, and more pre\u00adci\u00adsion is called for. The prob\u00adlem is that to cor\u00adrect\u00adly com\u00adpute the ninth impact, you need to take into account the grav\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtion\u00adal pull of some\u00adone stand\u00ading next to the table (mod\u00adest\u00adly, Berry\u2019s com\u00adpu\u00adta\u00adtions use a weight of less than 150 pounds). And to com\u00adpute the fifty-sixth impact, every sin\u00adgle ele\u00admen\u00adtary par\u00adti\u00adcle in the uni\u00adverse needs to be present in your assump\u00adtions! An elec\u00adtron at the edge of the uni\u00adverse, sep\u00ada\u00adrat\u00aded from us by 10 bil\u00adlion light-years, must fig\u00adure in the cal\u00adcu\u00adla\u00adtions, since it exerts a mean\u00ading\u00adful effect on the out\u00adcome\u2026. Note that this bil\u00adliard-ball sto\u00adry assumes a plain and sim\u00adple world; it does not even take into account these crazy social mat\u00adters pos\u00adsi\u00adbly endowed with free will. Page 178<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Wow. Wow back\u00adwards. <\/p>\n

We are made to fol\u00adlow lead\u00aders who can gath\u00ader peo\u00adple togeth\u00ader because the advan\u00adtages of being in groups trump the dis\u00adad\u00advan\u00adtages of being alone. It has been more prof\u00aditable for us to bind togeth\u00ader in the wrong direc\u00adtion than to be alone in the right one. Those who have fol\u00adlowed the assertive idiot rather than the intro\u00adspec\u00adtive wise per\u00adson have passed us some of their genes. Page 192<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And this is why char\u00adac\u00adter and doc\u00adtrine are always more impor\u00adtant when screen\u00ading min\u00adistry can\u00addi\u00addates than lead\u00ader\u00adship apti\u00adtude. Assertive idiots lead peo\u00adple into spir\u00adi\u00adtu\u00adal dis\u00adas\u00adter.<\/p>\n

Peo\u00adple are often ashamed of loss\u00ades, so they engage in strate\u00adgies that pro\u00adduce very lit\u00adtle volatil\u00adi\u00adty but con\u00adtain the risk of a large loss\u2014like col\u00adlect\u00ading nick\u00adels in front of steam\u00adrollers. Page 204<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I can total\u00adly see myself being talk\u00ading into doing that. What a vivid image.<\/p>\n

Many peo\u00adple do not real\u00adize that they are get\u00adting a lucky break in life when they get it. If a big pub\u00adlish\u00ader (or a big art deal\u00ader or a movie exec\u00adu\u00adtive or a hot\u00adshot banker or a big thinker) sug\u00adgests an appoint\u00adment, can\u00adcel any\u00adthing you have planned: you may nev\u00ader see such a win\u00addow open up again. I am some\u00adtimes shocked at how lit\u00adtle peo\u00adple real\u00adize that these oppor\u00adtu\u00adni\u00adties do not grow on trees. Col\u00adlect as many free non\u00adlot\u00adtery tick\u00adets (those with open-end\u00aded pay\u00adoffs) as you can, and, once they start pay\u00ading off, do not dis\u00adcard them. Work hard, not in grunt work, but in chas\u00ading such oppor\u00adtu\u00adni\u00adties and max\u00adi\u00admiz\u00ading expo\u00adsure to them. This makes liv\u00ading in big cities invalu\u00adable because you increase the odds of serendip\u00adi\u00adtous encounters\u2014you gain expo\u00adsure to the enve\u00adlope of serendip\u00adi\u00adty. The idea of set\u00adtling in a rur\u00adal area on grounds that one has good com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adca\u00adtions \u201cin the age of the Inter\u00adnet\u201d tun\u00adnels out of such sources of pos\u00adi\u00adtive uncer\u00adtain\u00adty. Diplo\u00admats under\u00adstand that very well: casu\u00adal chance dis\u00adcus\u00adsions at cock\u00adtail par\u00adties usu\u00adal\u00adly lead to big breakthroughs\u2014not dry cor\u00adre\u00adspon\u00addence or tele\u00adphone con\u00adver\u00adsa\u00adtions. Go to par\u00adties! If you\u2019re a sci\u00aden\u00adtist, you will chance upon a remark that might spark new research. Page 209<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Of such things are des\u00adtinies made.<\/p>\n

We can have a clear idea of the con\u00adse\u00adquences of an event, even if we do not know how like\u00adly it is to occur. I don\u2019t know the odds of an earth\u00adquake, but I can imag\u00adine how San Fran\u00adcis\u00adco might be affect\u00aded by one. This idea that in order to make a deci\u00adsion you need to focus on the con\u00adse\u00adquences (which you can know) rather than the prob\u00ada\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty (which you can\u2019t know) is the cen\u00adtral idea of uncer\u00adtain\u00adty. Much of my life is based on it. <\/p>\n

You can build an over\u00adall the\u00ado\u00adry of deci\u00adsion-mak\u00ading on this idea. All you have to do is mit\u00adi\u00adgate the con\u00adse\u00adquences. As I said, if my port\u00adfo\u00adlio is exposed to a mar\u00adket crash, the odds of which I can\u2019t com\u00adpute, all I have to do is buy insur\u00adance, or get out and invest the amounts I am not will\u00ading to ever lose in less risky secu\u00adri\u00adties. Page 211<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The results of an earth\u00adquake in San Fran\u00adcis\u00adco \u2014 bad. Prob\u00ada\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty \u2014 unac\u00adcept\u00adably high. Tick, tick, tick\u2026<\/p>\n

I said ear\u00adli\u00ader that ran\u00addom\u00adness is bad, but it is not always so. Luck is far more egal\u00adi\u00adtar\u00adi\u00adan than even intel\u00adli\u00adgence. If peo\u00adple were reward\u00aded strict\u00adly accord\u00ading to their abil\u00adi\u00adties, things would still be unfair\u2014people don\u2019t choose their abil\u00adi\u00adties. Ran\u00addom\u00adness has the ben\u00ade\u00adfi\u00adcial effect of reshuf\u00adfling society\u2019s cards, knock\u00ading down the big guy. Page 232<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The race is not always to the swift, and this is by design.<\/p>\n

Now why am I call\u00ading this busi\u00adness Madel\u00adbrot\u00adian, or frac\u00adtal, ran\u00addom\u00adness? Every sin\u00adgle bit and piece of this puz\u00adzle has been pre\u00advi\u00adous\u00adly men\u00adtioned by some\u00adone else, such as Pare\u00adto, Yule, and Zipf, but it was Man\u00addel\u00adbrot who a) con\u00adnect\u00aded the dots, b) linked ran\u00addom\u00adness to geom\u00ade\u00adtry (and a spe\u00adcial brand at that), and c) took the sub\u00adject to its nat\u00adur\u00adal con\u00adclu\u00adsion. Indeed many math\u00ade\u00admati\u00adcians are famous today part\u00adly because he dug out their works to back up his claims\u2014the strat\u00ade\u00adgy I am fol\u00adlow\u00ading here in this book. \u201cI had to invent my pre\u00adde\u00adces\u00adsors, so peo\u00adple take me seri\u00adous\u00adly,\u201d [Man\u00addel\u00adbrot] once told me, and he used the cred\u00adi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty of big guns as a rhetor\u00adi\u00adcal device. One can almost always fer\u00adret out pre\u00adde\u00adces\u00adsors for any thought. You can always find some\u00adone who worked on a part of your argu\u00adment and use his con\u00adtri\u00adbu\u00adtion as your back\u00adup. Page 256<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Ph.D. can\u00addi\u00addates take note. There are worse peo\u00adple to emu\u00adlate than Man\u00addel\u00adbrot.<\/p>\n

The degen\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtion of philo\u00adsoph\u00adi\u00adcal schools in its turn is the con\u00adse\u00adquence of the mis\u00adtak\u00aden belief that one can phi\u00adlos\u00ado\u00adphize with\u00adout hav\u00ading been com\u00adpelled to phi\u00adlos\u00ado\u00adphize by prob\u00adlems out\u00adside phi\u00adlos\u00ado\u00adphy\u2026. Gen\u00aduine philo\u00adsoph\u00adi\u00adcal prob\u00adlems are always root\u00aded out\u00adside phi\u00adlos\u00ado\u00adphy and they die if these roots decay\u2026. These roots are eas\u00adi\u00adly for\u00adgot\u00adten by philoso\u00adphers who \u201cstudy\u201d phi\u00adlos\u00ado\u00adphy instead of being forced into phi\u00adlos\u00ado\u00adphy by the pres\u00adsure of non\u00adphilo\u00adsoph\u00adi\u00adcal prob\u00adlems.
\nHe foot\u00adnotes Karl Pop\u00adper, Con\u00adjec\u00adtures and Refu\u00adta\u00adtions, pages 95\u201397.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And the\u00adol\u00ado\u00adgy that is divorced from dai\u00adly min\u00adistry gets wonky. All the great\u00adest the\u00adolo\u00adgians in the his\u00adto\u00adry of the church have been involved in reg\u00adu\u00adlar min\u00adistry to nor\u00admal peo\u00adple.<\/p>\n

I am most often irri\u00adtat\u00aded by those who attack the bish\u00adop but some\u00adone fall for the secu\u00adri\u00adties analyst\u2014those who exer\u00adcise their skep\u00adti\u00adcism against reli\u00adgion but not against econ\u00ado\u00admists, social sci\u00aden\u00adtists, and pho\u00adny sta\u00adtis\u00adti\u00adcians. Using the con\u00adfir\u00adma\u00adtion bias, peo\u00adple will tell you that reli\u00adgion was hor\u00adri\u00adble for mankind by count\u00ading deaths from the Inqui\u00adsi\u00adtion and var\u00adi\u00adous reli\u00adgious wars. But they will not show you how many peo\u00adple were killed by nation\u00adal\u00adism, social sci\u00adence, and polit\u00adi\u00adcal the\u00ado\u00adry under Stal\u00adin\u00adism or dur\u00ading the Viet\u00adnam War. Even priests don\u2019t go to bish\u00adops when they feel ill: their first stop is the doctor\u2019s. But we stop by the offices of many pseu\u00addo-sci\u00aden\u00adtists and \u201cexperts\u201d with\u00adout alter\u00adna\u00adtive. We no longer believe in papal infal\u00adli\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty; we seem to believe in the infal\u00adli\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty of the Nobel\u2026. Page 291<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Rare to read such clear think\u00ading about this in a book not devot\u00aded to apolo\u00adget\u00adics. Of course, Taleb has it in for the Nobel<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Imag\u00adine a speck of dust next to a plan\u00adet a bil\u00adlion times the size of earth. The speck of dust rep\u00adre\u00adsents the odds in favor of your being born; the huge plan\u00adet would be the odds against it. So stop sweat\u00ading the small stuff. Don\u2019t be like the ingrate who got a cas\u00adtle as a present and wor\u00adried about the mildew in the bath\u00adroom. Page 298<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Indeed. I like a book that clos\u00ades with a call to grat\u00adi\u00adtude, even if it\u2019s unclear to whom your grat\u00adi\u00adtude should be direct\u00aded<\/a>.<\/p>\n

A fun read. Rec\u00adom\u00admend\u00aded.<\/p>\n