
Nassim Taleb's Top 10 Life Tips - neilc
http://ben.casnocha.com/2008/06/nassim-talebs-t.html
======
comatose_kid
why have someone's distillation when the article is available here?
[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/art...](http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article4022091.ece?print=yes&randnum=1212475411171)

The following quote from the article:

"Take away religion, he says, and people start believing in nationalism, which
has killed far more people. Religion is also a good way of handling
uncertainty. It lowers blood pressure. He’s convinced that religious people
take fewer financial risks. "

is a pretty lame conjecture. Has nationalism really killed more people? Even
if it has, is there any proof that atheists are more prone to nationalism? And
even if that is so, is there any proof that nationalistic atheists are
responsible for any significant proportion of deaths attributable to
nationalism?

Contrary to the above, I did like most of the original article.

~~~
yummyfajitas
>Has nationalism really killed more people?

It's certainly plausible. Top 10 genocides of the 20'th century:

1: Great Leap Forward (Communist)

2: Soviet Purges/Ukrainian Famine (Communist)

3: Nazis (Nationalist)

3 (Roughly Tied): Congo Wars (Nationalist)

4: Imperial Japanese (Nationalist)

5: Pol Pot (Communist)

6: Kim (Communist)

7: Mengistu in Ethiopia (Mix of Communist and Nationalist)

8: Armenian Genocide by Turks (Nationalist)

9: Igbo genocide of Nigeria (Nationalist)

<http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html>

(Note: some of these numbers are sketchy, especially towards the bottom of the
list. The list also missed the Congo (WTF!), which I added.)

~~~
13th
And one more modern crime - Iraq War
[http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/international/europe/29cas...](http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/international/europe/29casualties.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)

And do not forget about Hiroshima...

p.s. world isn't black and white.

~~~
yummyfajitas
I only listed the top 10. Iraq and Hiroshima (FYI: Tokyo and Dresden are
better examples) just don't compare in scale to the Congo, the Nazi's or even
Rwanda.

Also, the study your article describes (and it's followup) is seriously
flawed.

------
jpeterson
"Skepticism is effortful and costly. It is better to be sceptical about
matters of large consequences, and be imperfect, foolish and human in the
small and the aesthetic."

This is kinda dangerous. Many times you don't know if a matter is of large or
small consequences unless you first approach it skeptically.

------
mynameishere
#2 _Go to parties._

Will do. Thanks for the tip. (Frankly, I'm surprised no one thought of that
before...)

 _You can’t even start to know what you may find on the envelope of
serendipity._

Parsing...parsing...

Okay, so for envelope he must mean one of the following definitions:

<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/envelope>

This? "something that envelops; a wrapper, integument, or surrounding cover."

Or this? (As a metaphor) "the technical limits within which an aircraft or
electronic system may be safely operated."

Okay, let's look at the context: "...parties...envelope...of serendipity".
Serendipity is a sort of accidental discovery. So at parties we find the
envelope (wrapper? limit?) of "Serendipity" Okay... maybe he means that
parties are a good place to accidentally discover things?

 _If you suffer from agoraphobia, send colleagues._

Right, because people who have agoraphobia typically have colleagues they can
order around. Howard Hughes and no one else maybe.

That's his #2 life tip. My #2 life tip is: "...but no simpler". My #1 tip is:
"Make everything as simple as possible". I can't possibly be alone in seeing
this list as combining the worst of banality and inscrutability.

~~~
walterk
'Envelope' in this context just means 'edge'. Taleb is just saying that some
of the best things may come from those most accidental, least expected of
serendipitous events that parties are, in a sense, designed to generate in the
first place. By going to more parties, you increase your exposure to that
edge.

It's also not uncommon for individuals who are people-shy to have friends,
partners who aren't, nor is it always necessary to "order around" these people
to convince them to go.

It's called being charitable. In other words, don't assume that a stupid
interpretation of what someone said is what they actually meant. If that's
what you're looking for, it's easy enough to find. Fox News talking heads are
great at this.

~~~
mynameishere
Yes, I translated it thus:

 _maybe he means that parties are a good place to accidentally discover
things?_

You translated it thus:

 _some of the best things may come from those most accidental, least expected
of serendipitous events that parties are, in a sense, designed to generate in
the first place._

So, miy translation is shorter but the same, and so I don't thing it is fair
to describe it as a "stupid interpretation".

My point is this: His style is pointlessly convoluted----obfuscation for the
sake of obfuscation----and that is an age-old rhetorical trick to make a
humdrum idea seem profound.

~~~
davidw
I was able to read Taleb in the _original English_ and understand what he
wrote and meant just fine, being a native speaker of said language.

~~~
mynameishere
Yeah, so did I. So did I.

But unlike many others, I recognized that he's using poor style as a
substitute for meaningful content. That's my point, which I apparently did not
make sufficiently clear for native speakers like yourself.

------
ojbyrne
There's some inspiring parts there, not quite scientific. "It is better to be
skeptical about matters of large consequences"

Just that clause is arresting.

------
Tichy
Ironic that the blogger is wearing a tie ;-)

------
calpaterson
The guy wrote a couple of popular "popular science" books. So now he's a
lifestyle guru?

------
nsrivast
I shall follow only the even ones.

