You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.81 AVERAGE
3.81 AVERAGE
Loved this book and the distinction between resilience and antifragility. Such an important concept in terms of brain and health functioning.
Having read Black Swan and Fooled by Randomness a while ago now I was looking forward to this ones as Taleb has a towering mind.
The basic premise in this book is that we all need to be more anti fragile, that is more resistant and resilient to shocks both large and small. He gives the example of small animals being able to absorb the shock from a drop, but large animals suffering because of their size. He favours the artisan producer rather than the mega corporation, and have a massive distrust of large corporations and their marketing.
He argues in here that the current systems, be it banks, governments and academia are all fragile, that is very susceptible to external shocks, and that the systems are geared to magnify these risks. An example if the banking crisis, where the risks taken got greater and greater, and yet those at the banks were bailed out. He thinks that making the traders and banker personally liable will have a major improvement to the global financial market.
Some of this was very hard to read, occasionally unreadable, and I think that the number of examples could have been reduced. A stronger editor would have been able to wrestle this into a much more readable book, and the arguments would have been stronger.
The basic premise in this book is that we all need to be more anti fragile, that is more resistant and resilient to shocks both large and small. He gives the example of small animals being able to absorb the shock from a drop, but large animals suffering because of their size. He favours the artisan producer rather than the mega corporation, and have a massive distrust of large corporations and their marketing.
He argues in here that the current systems, be it banks, governments and academia are all fragile, that is very susceptible to external shocks, and that the systems are geared to magnify these risks. An example if the banking crisis, where the risks taken got greater and greater, and yet those at the banks were bailed out. He thinks that making the traders and banker personally liable will have a major improvement to the global financial market.
Some of this was very hard to read, occasionally unreadable, and I think that the number of examples could have been reduced. A stronger editor would have been able to wrestle this into a much more readable book, and the arguments would have been stronger.
I'll admit it - I cheated and skimmed the last third or so. I have some criticism (for one, I found a great deal of the content repetitive), but Mr. Taleb has earned my respect nonetheless. Perhaps he'll be glad I gave up on reading this, since he strongly advocates pursuing one's personal interests. In my case, I am primarily a reader (and on rare occasion, writer) of fiction. As advised, I need to get more 'skin in the game', and I think repurposing the time I would have spent reading this book is a start.
Non-fiction of this sort tends to register as 'real life', which I prefer to experience first-hand. Anecdotes and case studies have more impact when you're the one sharing them, no? At least, if you're in the habit of analysing them to bits with every retelling. Being the sole owner of the experience, you are entitled to use your experiences as you see fit. I think Mr. Taleb made this point as well.
In reading this book, I learned that I was probably not the target audience. While I won't go so far as to call myself enlightened, I agreed with many of the points made. It made me feel somewhat uneasy. Being repeatedly persuaded to abide by my own personal philosophy, as though I'd forgotten who I was as a person.
No rating, since to rate something I did not give my full attention to would be unfair.
Non-fiction of this sort tends to register as 'real life', which I prefer to experience first-hand. Anecdotes and case studies have more impact when you're the one sharing them, no? At least, if you're in the habit of analysing them to bits with every retelling. Being the sole owner of the experience, you are entitled to use your experiences as you see fit. I think Mr. Taleb made this point as well.
In reading this book, I learned that I was probably not the target audience. While I won't go so far as to call myself enlightened, I agreed with many of the points made. It made me feel somewhat uneasy. Being repeatedly persuaded to abide by my own personal philosophy, as though I'd forgotten who I was as a person.
No rating, since to rate something I did not give my full attention to would be unfair.
I half like the book and yet also found a lot of it petty, griping and meandering from thought to notion without much of either. This is not a book to be taken as a whole, dip and dive but it is for the most part fluff.
In the book there is an anecdote of a student asking about what to read to which he replies along the lines of read nothing that's more recent than five years about anything more recent than twenty years ago. I forgot the exact range he supposedly suggested but this book immediately fails his own advice. Come back to it in another few years.
In the book there is an anecdote of a student asking about what to read to which he replies along the lines of read nothing that's more recent than five years about anything more recent than twenty years ago. I forgot the exact range he supposedly suggested but this book immediately fails his own advice. Come back to it in another few years.
slow-paced
Never have I read a book I disliked so much despite agreeing with the underlying premise. After 90 pages I could endure it no longer. The problem is that the author tries too hard to be funny, which ok some humor is an acquired taste, but he rags on all sorts of professions (doctors, accountants, professors, etc) for them being intrinsically unethical - a hard stretch. Furthermore, he uses evidence that is wrong. The last straw was “…Fukushima nuclear reactor, which experienced a catastrophic failure in 2011 when a tsunami struck. It had been built to withstand the worst past historical earthquake, with the builders not imagining much worse…” which is patently false (see below). Ultimately the author is to focused on everyone else being wrong rather than showing what’s right and it got too distracting to finish.
Addendum: The reactor did not account for the rest of Japan being out of power for so long and should have been caught, yes, but the design spec was to survive a 8.25 magnitude earthquake, which was a very statistically rare event and within worldwide standards. Not to mention it survived the 9 magnitude earthquake just fine (it was the tsunami that was the problem).
Real review at some point but, short version: Taleb describes systems that get stronger from volatility and mistreatment ("to a point"), and compares them with our tendency to plan and predict and generally design systems that break down when things don't go according to plan. There is a lot of insightful stuff in here, and some excellent unconventional thinking, and/but his writing style is a bit glib and can get in the way of his point being made. Sometimes.
This was a fascinating non-fiction read about a philosophy of antifragility.
(What is the opposite of fragile? Robust, strong, resilient all fall short . . .ergo . . .antifragile)
The author/philosopher/teacher is a big believer in antifragility, and the book is spent explaining what it means in different contexts.
I liked it, but did not love it. Also, heads up, you need to turn the ol' brain on to keep up with this guy.
(What is the opposite of fragile? Robust, strong, resilient all fall short . . .ergo . . .antifragile)
The author/philosopher/teacher is a big believer in antifragility, and the book is spent explaining what it means in different contexts.
I liked it, but did not love it. Also, heads up, you need to turn the ol' brain on to keep up with this guy.
After reading and enjoying Taleb's book The Black Swan, I thought that I would similarly enjoy this book. While the book did contain many interesting overarching ideas, I found myself struggling to get through it especially towards the end. One of the main detractions for me while reading is the propensity for the author to create an excessive amount of words/metaphors that tend to detract rather than enhance understanding, e.g. neomania, ephinomonea, green lumbar fallacy, barbell strategy. I was constantly having to try and search through the glossary of terms to remind myself of what these self-created terms were meant to represent. In the end this book left me more frustrated and confused when I closed it rather than thought provoking.
Interesting concepts backed by evidence. I want to read it again. My favorite chapter is Via Negativa