It looks like Kahneman, Silver, et al are basically trying to figure out what doing things optimally would look like – which is a very nerdy project. Taleb is trying to figure out how to run systems without an assumption that you will necessarily be right very often.Since I've not read The Black Swan I can't comment on the accuracy of Scott's characterization but I like the sentiment it expresses, at least when applied to the broad mechanisms of how a society operates. I heartily dislike systems that are purportedly designed on principles of optimum efficiency and decision making because they are dependent on the views of the desired results of those designing the system and, at the same time, are overconfident in their ability to manage human beings and of their (and our) perfectability. I like the more humble approach of a system that accepts the reality we may often be wrong.
It will come as no surprise to those who read THC that we see the United States Constitution as an example of a system designed with the awareness of the human condition and the uncertainty of the quality of our decision making.
And, by the way, Scott's review is very witty and thoughtful - worth the read - though, as is often the case with his posts, it could have been as effective at half the length.
No comments:
Post a Comment