Theme: Science

  • Taleb as Scam Artist Undermining Western Civilization

    —“Taleb, like Gould, is trying to demonise mainstream psychology–but he’s only successful in creating a folk demon for the lay public. He knows that anyone with any technical expertise thinks he’s a clown. But he doesn’t care, because accuracy is less important to him than fame.”—Claire Lehmann @clairlemon

    [I] don’t want to be the front man on this subject but he’s not trying to take down psychology, he’s trying to justify arab immigration to the west, and satisfy the chip on his shoulder as a christian arab. His empirical work was a dead end, and he can’t tolerate the truth: Trust. West and east used tests successfully to filter out corruption for positions in government. Same for military, then same for academy. Wealth is available across the bell curve, with complexity (IQ) determining your market. You need conscientiousness to accumulate that wealth. What taleb is attempting to obscure is west can create large complex organizations because of trust and trust under rule of law, and rule of law by filtering out corruption granting privilege to IQ. He can’t face that because levantines cannot create trust, rule of law or large complex organizations, because they thing lying is a tool, cunning is of merit, outwitting by cunning superior than outwitting by increase in productivity, quality, or innovation, and that the commons is to be pilfered rather than invested in at every opportunity. So taleb is missing the whole point: that he is only able to use his techniques of via-negativa risk invstment, becuase he is in the only high trust polity, using IMMORAL MEANS OF GAIN, and so is his alter ego “Fat Tony”. These men are, by western ethics and morality ‘Scammers”. Yet Taleb’s entire literature is devoted to lionizing scamming while ridiculing those who hold positions of privilege (influence) precisely because they are not in the scamming business. Now, this analysis will expose the primary difference between middle eastern and western people and it will explain why certain groups profit in certain industries: because they are immoral, and westerners are not.Morality requires reciprocity: productive, fully informed,warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of costs by externality against interests. It is quite profitable to engage in immorality among moral people, just as it is less so among immoral people. And the finance business is by and large unproductive. In other words a westerner would never engage in the tactic used by Georg Soros, which was extractive. He did. So whether you cast these people as amoral or immoral, intentional or unintentional, or genetically or culturally different,the reality is that only westerners practice material Reciprocity and verbal reciprocity Truth,and because we do we produce high trust and large complex disproportionately productive organizations from the family to the enterprise to the state. And lower trust people that do NOT sort for trust and grant privilege to people who have ability in complexity to PRESERVE that TRUST. That is what the chinese and the west did. What institutions did the middle east foster instead? Cunning, Cheating, Lying, Rent seeking, taxing trade routes rather than producing. They lauded inbreeding, familiasm, tribalism, and not trust and productivity – and they rewarded dogmatists not talent. As such they could not produce a middle class, middle class majority population, and middle class ethics, and as such they could not push trustworthiness down into the middle, working, and lower classes. Which is why they remained poor despite taxing world trade and consuming the genetic, cultural, institutional, knowledge and aesthetic capital of five great civilizations and reducing them to ignorance, poverty and dysgenia. So yes you can make money if your conscientious at every point in the IQ curve but you cannot push trust, reciprocity, truth, and duty, judge and jury, contract and rule of law, down into a population and produce the multiples of scale, unless you FILTER upward for both intelligence (complexity) and conscientiousness, and you reward the combination with status and income, forcing a status hierarchy that must be imitated. And that’s before we get to the fact that smarter people are better at suppressing error – which strangely, Taleb, as another proponent of via-negativa seems to overlook. And that as we scale opportunities are not scarcer, but more plentiful, but so are the increasing cascades of error. So you know, basically, Taleb has been trying to teach the west how to devolve into a low trust bunch of middle eastern scam artists and calling it ‘smart’. Meanwhile, he fails to grasp that those ‘educated but unintelligent people’ are in their position to eliminate error and low trust, not to maximize profits. Which if you have been following along this argument I’m making, means that not maximizing personal profit maximizes ALL. So let me reduce Taleb’s life’s work as an essayist in ridicule of western civilization to its foundations: (a) Mandelbrot was right that the stock market is just noise so w/o inside information just invest in funds. … (and here comes the big one) (b) rule of law and involuntary warranty must be extended from commercial goods and services to all information in the marketplace. yes that’s right. We gave license to people to not warranty their words in the 20th, and that’s the reason we are where we are today. Period. Did you make that leap with me? Well, then follow me. Taleb is a Charlatan who at first glance popularized Mandelbrot’s insights through humorous ego-inspiring essays making us feel smart like it made him feel smart. But the reality is, we have been smart for 5000 years: warranty of one’s words, martial testimony “reporting” in all walks of life. The RETURNS ON COMMONS make Private returns possible, and commons require high trust and that’s why europeans are the only people to have produced them. We call it the civil society.

  • Did you make that leap with me? Well, then follow me. Taleb is a Charlatan who a

    Did you make that leap with me? Well, then follow me.

    Taleb is a Charlatan who at first glance popularized Mandelbrot’s insights through humorous ego-inspiring essays making us feel smart like it made him feel smart. But the reality is, we have been smart for 5000 years: …


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 15:40:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179783331346571264

    Reply addressees: @clairlemon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179782863631376385


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @clairlemon (b) rule of law and involuntary warranty must be extended from commercial goods and services to all information in the marketplace. yes that’s right. We gave license to people to not warranty their words in the 20th, and that’s the reason we are where we are today. Period.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179782863631376385


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @clairlemon (b) rule of law and involuntary warranty must be extended from commercial goods and services to all information in the marketplace. yes that’s right. We gave license to people to not warranty their words in the 20th, and that’s the reason we are where we are today. Period.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179782863631376385

  • So let me reduce Taleb’s life’s work as an essayist in ridicule of western civil

    So let me reduce Taleb’s life’s work as an essayist in ridicule of western civilization to its foundations: (a) Mandelbrot was right that the stock market is just noise so w/o inside information just invest in funds. … (and here comes the big one) …


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 15:37:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179782650346819585

    Reply addressees: @clairlemon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179781837494857728


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @clairlemon Meanwhile, he fails to grasp that those ‘educated but unintelligent people’ are in their position to eliminate error and low trust, not to maximize profits. Which if you have been following along this argument I’m making, means that not maximizing personal profit maximizes ALL.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179781837494857728


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @clairlemon Meanwhile, he fails to grasp that those ‘educated but unintelligent people’ are in their position to eliminate error and low trust, not to maximize profits. Which if you have been following along this argument I’m making, means that not maximizing personal profit maximizes ALL.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179781837494857728

  • Well, you know, Gould might have thought he was doing well, just like Marx or Fr

    Well, you know, Gould might have thought he was doing well, just like Marx or Freud, or Adorno, or Derrida, but it turns out he was wrong about everything with the one exception, maybe, punctuated equilibrium. Not sure why you’re defending the guy. Cognitive bias ruled him too.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 15:06:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179774662613573633

    Reply addressees: @LTF_01

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179750459772456965


    IN REPLY TO:

    @LTF_01

    Just a reminder to go read my article in Skeptic on Stephen Jay Gould where I specifically mention Quillette for continuously making claims like this one. https://t.co/ByOTHtgAcD

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179750459772456965

  • It’s just a degree of precision:Analogy (wisdom) for broad, Virtues for less bro

    It’s just a degree of precision:Analogy (wisdom) for broad, Virtues for less broad, General Rules for narrower, Law for narrower, science for narrower, and math for narrowest. This range allows us graceful increase and decrease in precision – or dishonestly, to obscure precision.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 11:31:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179720554208739330

    Reply addressees: @undercoverhere1

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179719922726969349


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @undercoverhere1 Wisdom literature is awesome. Fairy Tales, Myths, Legends, all use unknown forces to educate us. That’s just different from using wisdom (advice) as truth (decidability). One cannot deduce in argument from such premises. But one can seek counsel, and give counsel with wisdom.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179719922726969349


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @undercoverhere1 Wisdom literature is awesome. Fairy Tales, Myths, Legends, all use unknown forces to educate us. That’s just different from using wisdom (advice) as truth (decidability). One cannot deduce in argument from such premises. But one can seek counsel, and give counsel with wisdom.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179719922726969349

  • Scientific statements are two sided: the story we use to find opportunities and

    Scientific statements are two sided: the story we use to find opportunities and the processes we use to take advantage of the opportunities. The stories of any non trivial opportunity, and its processes will constantly evolve more parsimony: So the stories are myths: Partly true.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-02 03:12:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179232771023212544

    Reply addressees: @LTF_01

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179231269282029568


    IN REPLY TO:

    @LTF_01

    Believe it or not, almost all of science is myth-making. https://t.co/yLI6cqAj4k

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179231269282029568

  • The left invented desirable denial, sophism and pseudoscience. The postwar right

    The left invented desirable denial, sophism and pseudoscience. The postwar right doubled down on moralizing, b/c they were as afraid of admitting western civ is eugenic as the left was of eugenics. It invalidated democracy as national virtue narrative, in addition to the church.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-02 02:53:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179227821513814018

    Reply addressees: @demontage2000 @JohnMarkSays @TOOEdit

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179225859368067072


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @demontage2000 @JohnMarkSays @TOOEdit The right loves the feeling of moral righteousness as much as the left loves outrage. But that is why conservative thinkers failed. We must like the founders, but better than they, create institutions and processes that provide shared incentives, not that require shared belief.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179225859368067072


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @demontage2000 @JohnMarkSays @TOOEdit The right loves the feeling of moral righteousness as much as the left loves outrage. But that is why conservative thinkers failed. We must like the founders, but better than they, create institutions and processes that provide shared incentives, not that require shared belief.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179225859368067072

  • Just stick with the science and get off of the moralizing and religiosity. it do

    Just stick with the science and get off of the moralizing and religiosity. it doesn’t sell except to people who share your moral intuitions.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-01 19:43:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179119659930542081

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179107484881113088


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    In other words, they’re correct. The problem is the directness of their solution dependent on the frailty of human character, rather than architecting a system of rules and incentives that create markets for punishment as well as markets for rewards.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179107484881113088


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    In other words, they’re correct. The problem is the directness of their solution dependent on the frailty of human character, rather than architecting a system of rules and incentives that create markets for punishment as well as markets for rewards.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179107484881113088

  • I think the NS ought to stick to the science: (a) they have a higher disgust res

    I think the NS ought to stick to the science: (a) they have a higher disgust response (purity), (b) higher sensitivity to capital(genetic), parasitism, risk (ir-reciprocity) (c) a higher demand for loyalty and hierarchy(order) in defense of purity, capital, order: natural law.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-01 18:55:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179107483765358593

  • ROLF: Is the general rule that dietary research has almost always been false? I

    ROLF: Is the general rule that dietary research has almost always been false? I mean, what have we really learned except eat meat and vegetables and fruit once in a while and only eat enough carbs to retain body water?


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-01 16:50:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179076017048211458

    Reply addressees: @DegenRolf

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1178891492284342272


    IN REPLY TO:

    @DegenRolf

    One of the largest scientific evaluations ever attempted cancels the red alert concerning red meat, finding it was based on bad data. https://t.co/5K0SAJ9lv2 https://t.co/qbGCLtLtHu

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1178891492284342272