Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitudes

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
reggiesimpson
Posts: 1610
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by reggiesimpson » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:41 pm

protagonist...........resolved previous post. Thanks to Lady geek................ and the manual dexterity of my daughter!

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:12 pm

reggiesimpson wrote:protagonist...........resolved previous post. Thanks to Lady geek................ and the manual dexterity of my daughter!
daughters rule!!!!

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:47 pm

LadyGeek wrote: Use color instead of spacing. Select the text, then "Font color" - blue will standout in the quote. "Preview" to see how it looks before posting ("Submit").
Hi, Lady Geek. I don't understand this. When I try quoting I go through the arduous process of just copying and pasting in the correct locations the appropriate bracketed html things that begin like quote="LadyGeek" and end like /quote. I don't see a "font color" option, and unfortunately, unlike Reggie, my daughter is miles away which is of no help.

If there is an easier way, could you please explain in a PM, or at least refer me to a source with an explanation?

Thanks in advance.....

protag.

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:49 pm

reggiesimpson wrote:...
Victoria. I submit that our very existence demonstrates our proneness to exercising our violent skills throughout history.
In keeping with the OP the chaos that violent outbursts creates may very well be at the heart of financial Swans/Fat tails. As has been previously discussed in trying to predict these categories of financial breakdowns and failing to do so successfully may be inherently tied to our own unpredictability! Hopefully the constructive use of our imagination may enable us to better predict these episodes (which seem to be getting closer together 1987,2000,2008).
FWIW, I always throw 1998 in there: LTCM, which nearly brought us an '08-type crisis.
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:56 pm

protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:
My point is that, to be fair, it's possible Taleb's writing in Antifragile got in the way of his message, his points, and ideas. I'm saying that it's possible that if he had an editor like Perkins, or a team of strong editors, it might be a different book. Then again, his editors may have made it a better book and for whatever reasons couldn't make it better still. It's unlikely we'll ever know for certain what the give and take was during the editing. Still, Taleb is read mainly for his ideas and if his writing doesn't bring them out clearly, it's up to the editor to make that happen as much as possible, usually by making suggestions to the author for a rewrite. Also, I'm sure there is extra pressure on editors working with a best-selling author like Taleb who may need more help than usual with a new book.
This has been reiterated by so many here, which is perhaps why, until now, I have chosen to digest Taleb's ideas through his excellent volunteer editors, especially you and Victoria, than to tackle the work myself....
You'll have to eliminate me, as I also have been digesting Taleb largely through her excellent interpretations of Antifragile, and even at times with Swan, which I thought I understood quite well.
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:01 pm

Fallible wrote:
reggiesimpson wrote:...
Victoria. I submit that our very existence demonstrates our proneness to exercising our violent skills throughout history.
In keeping with the OP the chaos that violent outbursts creates may very well be at the heart of financial Swans/Fat tails. As has been previously discussed in trying to predict these categories of financial breakdowns and failing to do so successfully may be inherently tied to our own unpredictability! Hopefully the constructive use of our imagination may enable us to better predict these episodes (which seem to be getting closer together 1987,2000,2008).
FWIW, I always throw 1998 in there: LTCM, which nearly brought us an '08-type crisis.
Nowadays one bubble after another, which in retrospect should have been predictable due to policies promulgated in the Greenspan era allowing for (and still allowing for) the creative exercise of greed with impunity, reversing the post-1929/depression protections that immunized the markets for the following sixty or so years. They are now so common that they hardly can be considered "black swans" any more.

reggiesimpson
Posts: 1610
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by reggiesimpson » Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:09 pm

protagonist wrote:
LadyGeek wrote: Use color instead of spacing. Select the text, then "Font color" - blue will standout in the quote. "Preview" to see how it looks before posting ("Submit").
Hi, Lady Geek. I don't understand this. When I try quoting I go through the arduous process of just copying and pasting in the correct locations the appropriate bracketed html things that begin like quote="LadyGeek" and end like /quote. I don't see a "font color" option, and unfortunately, unlike Reggie, my daughter is miles away which is of no help.

If there is an easier way, could you please explain in a PM, or at least refer me to a source with an explanation?

Thanks in advance.....

protag.
After you hit the "quote" the "font color" option is in one of the multiple boxes above that quote.

User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 49128
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by LadyGeek » Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:20 pm

Protagonist, I sent you a PM.

As a reminder, economic policy discussions are off-topic.
Wiki To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Sun Feb 24, 2013 10:48 am

protagonist wrote:Hi, Victoria.
Hi Protagonist,
protagonist wrote:
VictoriaF wrote: Kahneman and Renshon wrote a paper "Why Hawks Win." They looked at various cognitive biases and noticed that all relevant biases favor hawks. Kahneman and Renshon do not make any statements about the merits of hawkish or dovish attitudes themselves, but rather observe a persistent bias in one direction.
Couldn't this be due to the (seemingly) obvious fact that the more powerful force is the one most inclined to hawkish behavior in the first place, rather than in the inherent bias favoring hawkish behavior per se? The 98-pound weakling is not usually stupid enough to kick sand in the face of the big bully, nor is the spear-holder likely to waive his spear in the face of the guy holding the gun. An unarmed diver would not be very wise to swim up to a hammerhead minding its own business and punch it in the eye, but if armed and in the safety of her boat the weakling suddenly turns hawkish. For obvious survival reasons, you don't tug on Superman's cape...those inclined to "hawkish" behavior in the first place are those most likely to win by using it, and in most cases, they do. History is filled with examples of the mouse ignoring the obvious, roaring, and getting clobbered (eg: Masada, or more recently, Saddam Hussein's invasion of the US-ally Kuwait).
It's not so obvious, because the balance of power is not known in advance. If it is known, there is no conflict; there is avoidance by the weak or slaughter by the strong. Take WWII. The 98-pound weakling of Czechoslovakia was sacrificed, the unarmed diver of Poland was ruthlessly divided by the sharks, and the great powers formed coalitions, each of which was sure of its victory. For a while, the Axis Powers seemed a better bet.

protagonist wrote:
VictoriaF wrote: Specifically:
  • - Before a conflict, the optimism bias makes it easier for people to assume that they would win and win quickly. This is similar to 85% of people considering themselves above-average drivers, lovers, and alcohol-holders.
Thanks. It's reassuring to hear that I am in the majority.
I would not expect anything less. Where you are coming from, drivers have a reputation.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:04 pm

protagonist wrote:
VictoriaF wrote: Specifically:
  • - Before a conflict, the optimism bias makes it easier for people to assume that they would win and win quickly. This is similar to 85% of people considering themselves above-average drivers, lovers, and alcohol-holders.
Thanks. It's reassuring to hear that I am in the majority.
I would not expect anything less. Where you are coming from, drivers have a reputation.

Victoria[/quote]

As do lovers. That's at least two out of three. Also, muggers and thieves, and I would expect drinkers as well. Documentation: I refer you to "Dirty Water" by the Standells: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5apEctKwiD8

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:18 pm

This was a Monty Hall problem.

Victoria
Last edited by VictoriaF on Mon Feb 25, 2013 9:22 am, edited 2 times in total.

Flann O'Brien
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:32 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Flann O'Brien » Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:53 pm

Regarding tourists and adventurers, G.K. Chesterton observed that "An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered."

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:39 pm

Flann O'Brien wrote:Regarding tourists and adventurers, G.K. Chesterton observed that "An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered."
If a tourist and an adventurer have the same negative experience, then with respect to that particular mishap the main difference between them is in their perceptions: rightly vs. wrongly. The experiences before the mishap have made the adventurer less fragile (more antifragile). And after the mishap, the strengthened adventurer will continue exploring, while the disheartened tourist will decline further travels.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

eucalyptus
Posts: 587
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by eucalyptus » Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:39 pm

Wonderful discussion and links, thanks to all who've posted.

Is anyone else reminded, by the extension of antifragility as a theory applicable to everything, of Wolfram's A New Kind of Science?

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:21 am

VictoriaF wrote:This was a Monty Hall problem.

Victoria
What was?

Oh, wait. I think I get it now. The part about wishing the doors weren't locked? hahahahahhaa...good one...

(In the best of all possible worlds, I wish I was the Standells' drummer. He seems like the perfect combination of dorky and cool. Besides, if you watch the video, you will see he developed the amazing technique of making his drums make noise without hitting them. To my knowledge, nobody before or since...not Max Roach, not Art Blakey, not Buddy Rich, not John Bonham....could duplicate that feat.
Last edited by protagonist on Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:49 am, edited 2 times in total.

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:28 am

eucalyptus wrote:Wonderful discussion and links, thanks to all who've posted.

Is anyone else reminded, by the extension of antifragility as a theory applicable to everything, of Wolfram's A New Kind of Science?
I'm sticking my neck out here, since I have not read "A New Kind of Science", and my familiarity with Taleb is limited to what I have read in these forums. But I am (superficially) familiar with Wolfram's work with cellular automata and complexity theory, and based on that, it seems to me (as well as perhaps to you) that many of Taleb's "ideas" (as expressed by those here) are derivative of that work and that of others in the general realm of complexity, chaos, fractal geometry, cellular automata, etc. Perhaps one who has read the book would like to comment further.

User avatar
market timer
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:42 am

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by market timer » Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:03 pm

protagonist wrote:Perhaps one who has read the book would like to comment further.
Antifragility is the first book of Taleb's that discusses complexity theory. In particular, he explains how fragility of individuals gives rise to antifragility of the society as an emergent property. He gives credit to research done at places like the Santa Fe Institute.

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:48 pm

market timer wrote:
protagonist wrote:Perhaps one who has read the book would like to comment further.
Antifragility is the first book of Taleb's that discusses complexity theory. In particular, he explains how fragility of individuals gives rise to antifragility of the society as an emergent property. He gives credit to research done at places like the Santa Fe Institute.
Thanks, MT. It is reassuring to know that he gives credit where credit is due. Some other posters in these forums have suggested otherwise.

hsv_climber
Posts: 3969
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 7:56 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by hsv_climber » Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:29 pm

Fallible wrote:
My point is that, to be fair, it's possible Taleb's writing in Antifragile got in the way of his message, his points, and ideas.
I don't think so. It is not the writing that has bothered me, but the message. And the message is "I am the CHOSEN ONE, so do as I say. You should do XYZ...".
But XYZ is either a trivial thing, completely wrong or arguably wrong.

Here is my take on some of Viktoria's points, as well as some other points from Taleb's book:

- <completely wrong> We need to return to Gold standard.
Facts: Has Taleb forgot the lessons of Great Depression? Why is he advocating return to the gold standard in his book?

- <completely wrong> Sweden has cut deficit and its economy has improved
Facts: It is the other way around. One of the comments on Amazon brought up the issue and Taleb was tried to counter, but could not. Taleb was clearly fudging data on this one. Look up on Amazon.

- <completely wrong> Bicycles are unsafe.
Facts: Multiple studies have shown that per time / per user, it is equivalently dangerous to ride a car and ride a bicycle. In fact, bicycle riding is safer for certain age groups.

- <completely wrong> Scientists are useless. Even Jet engine was designed by engineers.
Facts: Huh? Does he even know the difference between scientists and engineers? Of course, an engineer would design an engine. That what engine(ers) do.

- <arguably wrong> E-readers are fragile, books are robust.
Facts: E-readers have open the world of opportunities to enjoy books for many people. Personally, I've read "Antifragility" on my Kindle. If he is unaware of it and would like to ignore new technologies so be it. Surprisingly, he is not calling his Mac "fragile". Selective memory?

- <arguably wrong> Tourist vs. Adventurer (or Flâneur)
I've just laughed at his definition of Adventurer. I hike / backpack / climb / cycle / ski / etc. and Taleb calls an adventurer a guy who can survive a closed restaurant. No comments. :D

- <trivial> Hot, cold and in-between.
My Power company sends me a letter every few months letting me know that it is good for me and the environment if I'd use less A/C in the Summer and less heat in the winter. What is so revolutionary here in Taleb's book? Reprinting the letter from the utility company (or from Mr. Money Mustache blog)?

.....

I can go on with this list almost forever....

I've read all 4 Taleb books. I've liked the first 100 or so pages of "Black Swan" which were used to introduce the concept. I've read "Fooled by Randomness" after "Black Swan", so I've got nothing new out of it. I did not like "Antifragility". He is either fudging the data to prove his examples or ignore proves altogether.

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Tue Feb 26, 2013 11:36 am

Taleb seems to be a fascinating, controversial subject. Others have criticized him here, but I thought hsv-climber's critique above was the most damning I have read. Many others attack him for style (not very damning at all...most great philosophers could be attacked on style), or on being no more than a popularizer of accepted wisdom (only an attack if he claims to be something more).

Occasionally I have read substantive attacks, such as on his off-the-wall investment advice. But hsv makes him seem like an intellectually dishonest, hypocritical, pompous fool...at least in my reading....and if his statements are true and not mere out-of-context wise-ass distortions, most of his arguments seem fairly solid.

If one is to believe hsv_climber, Taleb fudges his data. He advocates return to the gold standard, an idea rejected by nearly the entire civilized world in the early 20th century. He considers an "adventurer" one who can handle finding a restaurant closed, yet he himself is afraid to ride a bicycle. He advocates living in cosmopolitan major cities and yet criticizes those who use air conditioning and central heating as "anti-fragile". He has the audacity to challenge the "robustness" of Kindle users vs book readers (the most specious argument I have heard against e-readers), while simultaneously using Kindle to publish and sell his own work. He uses the argument that engineers design engines to claim that scientists are useless. Wow.

Yet Taleb seems so highly respected by intelligent people. This creates conflict in my mind, and makes it all interesting, which is why I have been eagerly awaiting a rebuttal. Nobody took hsv on, which really surprises me. I want to see some of Taleb's fans defend him, because in the absence of a sound defense, he sure sounds like an idiot.

hsv_climber
Posts: 3969
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 7:56 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by hsv_climber » Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:28 pm

protagonist wrote: He advocates living in cosmopolitan major cities and yet criticizes those who use air conditioning and central heating as "anti-fragile".
protagonist, it is even worse than your above statement. He criticizes the use of A/C, but does not criticize heating. Victoria might want to re-read this portion of the book and change her original post on that. That made me LOL when I was reading the book, since I live in Alabama and we can survive without heater, but not without A/C. People actually die around here without A/C when we have heat waves and triple digits. I am sure that situation is different in Taleb's NY home.

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:38 pm

protagonist wrote:...

Yet Taleb seems so highly respected by intelligent people. This creates conflict in my mind, and makes it all interesting, which is why I have been eagerly awaiting a rebuttal. Nobody took hsv on, which really surprises me. I want to see some of Taleb's fans defend him, because in the absence of a sound defense, he sure sounds like an idiot.
Hi Protagonist and hsv_climber,

Fyi and fwiw, hsv_climber just responded briefly to my comment on editing and from there on took up Taleb's ideas, so I saw no need to respond, especially since I haven't yet read Antifragile (though I've probably never read so much about a book before reading it).

Fallible
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:35 pm

Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:...

Yet Taleb seems so highly respected by intelligent people. This creates conflict in my mind, and makes it all interesting, which is why I have been eagerly awaiting a rebuttal. Nobody took hsv on, which really surprises me. I want to see some of Taleb's fans defend him, because in the absence of a sound defense, he sure sounds like an idiot.
Hi Protagonist and hsv_climber,

Fyi and fwiw, hsv_climber just responded briefly to my comment on editing and from there on took up Taleb's ideas, so I saw no need to respond, especially since I haven't yet read Antifragile (though I've probably never read so much about a book before reading it).

Fallible
That makes two of us, Fallie- can't respond since I haven't read him at all. So where are all of his defenders? I can't imagine that so many here could take him so seriously if he REALLY said all those things that hsv_climber claims, but, despite 120 posts in this thread and even more in the last Taleb thread I read, no rebuttal seems forthcoming.

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:05 pm

protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:...

Yet Taleb seems so highly respected by intelligent people. This creates conflict in my mind, and makes it all interesting, which is why I have been eagerly awaiting a rebuttal. Nobody took hsv on, which really surprises me. I want to see some of Taleb's fans defend him, because in the absence of a sound defense, he sure sounds like an idiot.
Hi Protagonist and hsv_climber,

Fyi and fwiw, hsv_climber just responded briefly to my comment on editing and from there on took up Taleb's ideas, so I saw no need to respond, especially since I haven't yet read Antifragile (though I've probably never read so much about a book before reading it).

Fallible
That makes two of us, Fallie- can't respond since I haven't read him at all. So where are all of his defenders? I can't imagine that so many here could take him so seriously if he REALLY said all those things that hsv_climber claims, but, despite 120 posts in this thread and even more in the last Taleb thread I read, no rebuttal seems forthcoming.
Have you read Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow?
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Tue Feb 26, 2013 10:12 pm

Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:...

Yet Taleb seems so highly respected by intelligent people. This creates conflict in my mind, and makes it all interesting, which is why I have been eagerly awaiting a rebuttal. Nobody took hsv on, which really surprises me. I want to see some of Taleb's fans defend him, because in the absence of a sound defense, he sure sounds like an idiot.
Hi Protagonist and hsv_climber,

Fyi and fwiw, hsv_climber just responded briefly to my comment on editing and from there on took up Taleb's ideas, so I saw no need to respond, especially since I haven't yet read Antifragile (though I've probably never read so much about a book before reading it).

Fallible
That makes two of us, Fallie- can't respond since I haven't read him at all. So where are all of his defenders? I can't imagine that so many here could take him so seriously if he REALLY said all those things that hsv_climber claims, but, despite 120 posts in this thread and even more in the last Taleb thread I read, no rebuttal seems forthcoming.
Have you read Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow?
No. I have only read what posters say about it in this forum. Why do you ask??

prot.

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:07 am

protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:...
Have you read Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow?
No. I have only read what posters say about it in this forum. Why do you ask??

prot.
If you'd read it I was going to ask you what you thought of System 1 and System 2. It's a great book by one of the greatest psychologists.
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:37 am

Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:...
Have you read Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow?
No. I have only read what posters say about it in this forum. Why do you ask??

prot.
If you'd read it I was going to ask you what you thought of System 1 and System 2. It's a great book by one of the greatest psychologists.
Yes, I get the impression from the posts about him that it is an impressive work. I don't read much psychology these days.

I generally have an issue with social scientists reducing infinitely complex, evolved behaviors into categories and labeling them things like "system 1" and "system 2" in order to try to make sense out of things that are too nuanced in reality to reduce. I'm not saying Kahneman does this...I haven't read him...I am speaking more generally.

There are only two types of people in the world. Those who divide people into two types, and those who don't. :D

(I never used an emoticon before, by the way. Never.)

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:49 am

One last plea. Come on, people! With so many showing so much respect for Taleb (both here and elsewhere, judging from the accolades all over the web), won't ANYONE who has actually read him defend him against the vicious accusations made by hsv_climber??? The lack of response is making me think that hsv is right, the majority is wrong, and Taleb IS a dishonest, hypocritical idiot, hardly worth reading. Does hsv_climber get the last word on Taleb here?

Jebediah
Posts: 515
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:19 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Jebediah » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:27 pm

IMO hsv_climber is right on, and yes he probably could go on forever. Nobody said anything about Taleb being an 'idiot'. Put it this way: Holden Caulfield would probably want to poke him in the eye.

eucalyptus
Posts: 587
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by eucalyptus » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:40 pm

protagonist wrote:One last plea. Come on, people! With so many showing so much respect for Taleb (both here and elsewhere, judging from the accolades all over the web), won't ANYONE who has actually read him defend him against the vicious accusations made by hsv_climber??? The lack of response is making me think that hsv is right, the majority is wrong, and Taleb IS a dishonest, hypocritical idiot, hardly worth reading. Does hsv_climber get the last word on Taleb here?

Much about Taleb can be caricatured, especially IMO his belligerent machismo. If Taleb thinks lifting weights, having the physique of a bodyguard, makes one anti-fragile, he has lead a very protected life. The world is full of people who are "office tough" or "academia tough;" whether they'd survive in a truly tough environment may never be known. I wouldn't, and it seems to me that there's great value in knowing one's limitations. Robust isn't so bad.

Nonetheless in a world of the Kardashians and their legion of followers, an obviously bright, erudite intellectual, full of ideas and opinions, certainly is worthy of consideration and discussion, at the least.

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:51 pm

protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:...
Have you read Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow?
No. I have only read what posters say about it in this forum. Why do you ask??

prot.
If you'd read it I was going to ask you what you thought of System 1 and System 2. It's a great book by one of the greatest psychologists.
Yes, I get the impression from the posts about him that it is an impressive work. I don't read much psychology these days.

I generally have an issue with social scientists reducing infinitely complex, evolved behaviors into categories and labeling them things like "system 1" and "system 2" in order to try to make sense out of things that are too nuanced in reality to reduce. I'm not saying Kahneman does this...I haven't read him...I am speaking more generally. ...
Even some people who have read the book come away thinking it's as simple as #1 and #2 and that we should do away with #1 and be only #2. But it's the complexity of the two as they overlap that Kahneman (and others, since a so-called "divided self" goes back to Plato) writes about so well. The mind, he says, is an "uneasy interaction between two fictitious characters: the automatic System 1 and the effortful System 2." In making us more aware of that complex interaction, of how our minds work, the hope is we can learn to improve our thinking and behavior. Another book that gets into this in a more fun way is Dan Ariely's Predictably Irrational.
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:57 pm

eucalyptus wrote:The world is full of people who are "office tough" or "academia tough;" whether they'd survive in a truly tough environment may never be known.
Very good point. If Taleb feels like an adventurer by handling the closing of a restaurant in NYC, but is afraid to ride a bike, he may be one of those.
eucalyptus wrote:Nonetheless in a world of the Kardashians and their legion of followers, an obviously bright, erudite intellectual, full of ideas and opinions, certainly is worthy of consideration and discussion, at the least.
I've never seen the Kardashians, or Taleb, but I can't imagine that the Kardashians would say things that sound much less bright and erudite, or much less worthy of consideration and discussion, than some of the things hsv_climber accuses Taleb of espousing. It's one thing to be provocative (thinking of Tom Wolfe, or Matt Taibbi, or Richard Dawkins). I like that, whether I agree or not. It's another thing to sound ridiculous.
Last edited by protagonist on Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:07 pm

Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:
protagonist wrote:
Fallible wrote:...
Have you read Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow?
No. I have only read what posters say about it in this forum. Why do you ask??

prot.
If you'd read it I was going to ask you what you thought of System 1 and System 2. It's a great book by one of the greatest psychologists.
Yes, I get the impression from the posts about him that it is an impressive work. I don't read much psychology these days.

I generally have an issue with social scientists reducing infinitely complex, evolved behaviors into categories and labeling them things like "system 1" and "system 2" in order to try to make sense out of things that are too nuanced in reality to reduce. I'm not saying Kahneman does this...I haven't read him...I am speaking more generally. ...
Even some people who have read the book come away thinking it's as simple as #1 and #2 and that we should do away with #1 and be only #2. But it's the complexity of the two as they overlap that Kahneman (and others, since a so-called "divided self" goes back to Plato) writes about so well. The mind, he says, is an "uneasy interaction between two fictitious characters: the automatic System 1 and the effortful System 2." In making us more aware of that complex interaction, of how our minds work, the hope is we can learn to improve our thinking and behavior. Another book that gets into this in a more fun way is Dan Ariely's Predictably Irrational.
hmm. So his thinking is subtle. Sounds possibly interesting. From reading this thread I am still unclear as to what System 1 and System 2 represent (I don't expect people here to spoon-feed it to me- I need to do my homework). If my internet connection here was faster, I would watch the Kahneman/Taleb youtube video which might give me a good introduction to his work. Maybe I will do so when I return to the states (as long as it doesn't make me miss the Kardashians hehehehe).

Thanks, Fallible.
Last edited by protagonist on Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:20 pm

protagonist wrote:From reading this thread I am still unclear as to what System 1 and System 2 represent
If it may help, I discussed Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow in one of my course papers. Below, I removed the references to the subject of the paper and left only references to the book. The extensive citation is not my choice, it's the school's requirement. The paper is not published.
Victoria in a course paper wrote:Later Kahneman became interested in the thinking processes, where for the past twenty five years psychologists have distinguished between fast and slow thinking. Kahneman uses a metaphor of System 1 to refer to the fast, intuitive, automatic thinking and System 2 to refer to slow, deliberate, effortful thinking (p. 13). Kahneman notes that System-1 fast thinking includes “intuitive thought ... [and] entirely automatic activities of perception and memory” (p. 13). Intuitive thought has two variants, the expert and the heuristic (p. 13). These distinctions are important, because many human biases are caused by the heuristic operation of System 1. For example, System 1 is responsible for completing the phrase ‘bread and …’ and for answering 2 + 2 = ? (p. 21). “Other mental activities become fast and automatic with prolonged practice” (p. 22).

In contrast, “System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it, including complex computations. The operations of System 2 are often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice, and concentration” (p. 21). System 2 activities may include parking a car in a narrow space, filling out tax forms, and checking “the validity of a complex logical algorithm” (p. 22). “System 2 has some ability to change the way System 1 works, by programming normally automatic functions of attention and memory” (p. 23). System 2 is used to focus on a task, but “intense focusing on a task can make people effectively blind, even to stimuli that normally attract attention” (p. 23).

In general “most of what you (your System 2) think and do originates in your System 1, but System 2 takes over when things get difficult, and it normally has the last word” (p. 25). “System 1 has biases, however, systematic errors that it is prone to make in specified circumstances. [And] … it sometimes answers easier questions than the one it was asked, and it has little understanding of logic and statistics” (p. 25). It could be desirable to control switching from System 1 to System 2 in order to avoid biases. However, Kahneman notes that “because System 1 operates automatically and cannot be turned off at will, errors of intuitive thought are often difficult to prevent. Biases cannot always be avoided, because System 2 may have no clue to the error. Even when cues to likely errors are available, errors can be prevented only by the enhanced monitoring and effortful activity of System 2. As a way to live your life, however, continuous vigilance is not necessarily good, and it is certainly impractical” (p. 28).

Other relevant findings are that “effort is required to maintain simultaneously in memory several ideas that require separate action” (p. 36) and that “switching from one task to another is effortful, especially under time pressure” (p. 37).
Victoria
Last edited by VictoriaF on Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:39 pm

VictoriaF wrote:I discussed Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow in one of my course papers. Below, I removed the references to the subject of the paper and left only references to the book. The extensive citation is not my choice, it's the school's requirement. The paper is not published.
Victoria in a course paper wrote:Later Kahneman became interested in the thinking processes, where for the past twenty five years psychologists have distinguished between fast and slow thinking. Kahneman uses a metaphor of System 1 to refer to the fast, intuitive, automatic thinking and System 2 to refer to slow, deliberate, effortful thinking (p. 13). Kahneman notes that System-1 fast thinking includes “intuitive thought ... [and] entirely automatic activities of perception and memory” (p. 13). Intuitive thought has two variants, the expert and the heuristic (p. 13). These distinctions are important, because many human biases are caused by the heuristic operation of System 1. For example, System 1 is responsible for completing the phrase ‘bread and …’ and for answering 2 + 2 = ? (p. 21). “Other mental activities become fast and automatic with prolonged practice” (p. 22).

In contrast, “System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it, including complex computations. The operations of System 2 are often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice, and concentration” (p. 21). System 2 activities may include parking a car in a narrow space, filling out tax forms, and checking “the validity of a complex logical algorithm” (p. 22). “System 2 has some ability to change the way System 1 works, by programming normally automatic functions of attention and memory” (p. 23). System 2 is used to focus on a task, but “intense focusing on a task can make people effectively blind, even to stimuli that normally attract attention” (p. 23).

In general “most of what you (your System 2) think and do originates in your System 1, but System 2 takes over when things get difficult, and it normally has the last word” (p. 25). “System 1 has biases, however, systematic errors that it is prone to make in specified circumstances. [And] … it sometimes answers easier questions than the one it was asked, and it has little understanding of logic and statistics” (p. 25). This is the key to the availability heuristic mentioned in the Introduction section. It could be desirable to control switching from System 1 to System 2 in order to avoid biases. However, Kahneman notes that “because System 1 operates automatically and cannot be turned off at will, errors of intuitive thought are often difficult to prevent. Biases cannot always be avoided, because System 2 may have no clue to the error. Even when cues to likely errors are available, errors can be prevented only by the enhanced monitoring and effortful activity of System 2. As a way to live your life, however, continuous vigilance is not necessarily good, and it is certainly impractical” (p. 28).

Other relevant findings are that “effort is required to maintain simultaneously in memory several ideas that require separate action” (p. 36) and that “switching from one task to another is effortful, especially under time pressure” (p. 37).
Victoria
Thanks, Victoria. That was a good explanation. I remember a lot of people were reading a popular book a few years back....I think it might have been called "Blink"....that I believe argued that intuitive thought ("System 1"?) was often much more successful than deliberate logical thought ("System 2"?). But again I cannot comment because I didn't read it (the list of books I haven't read could fill a book *chuckle*)

I'm not sure I get the fine distinction between "expert" and "heuristic" intuition. For example, if an "expert" pianist intuitively goes for a particular note, doesn't he do it "heuristically", i.e. based on years of experience, as well as "expertly"?(maybe I am using the term "heuristic" improperly).

Anyway, you need not answer that. Yours was a good intro to his work.

Your comment "System 2 is used to focus on a task, but “intense focusing on a task can make people effectively blind, even to stimuli that normally attract attention”" reminded me of when I used to play chess as a kid. I would intensely focus on my plan three or four moves ahead, thinking I had it all figured out, totally blind to the forest, while my opponent would instantly snatch my queen. My marriage was a bit like that too (hoping you are laughing...)

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:50 pm

protagonist wrote:I'm not sure I get the fine distinction between "expert" and "heuristic" intuition. For example, if an "expert" pianist intuitively goes for a particular note, doesn't he do it "heuristically", i.e. based on years of experience, as well as "expertly"?(maybe I am using the term "heuristic" improperly).
I'd have to look it up, but I don't have the book handy at the moment. I've read Thinking, Fast and Slow only once, unlike The Black Swan. My tentative thought about the distinction is that a heuristic is something developed by the majority of people without really trying (e.g., availability heuristic), whereas expertise is specialized and requires extensive practice. On the second thought, my citation “Other mental activities become fast and automatic with prolonged practice” (p. 22) probably referred to the expert variety of the System 1 operation.
protagonist wrote:Your comment "System 2 is used to focus on a task, but “intense focusing on a task can make people effectively blind, even to stimuli that normally attract attention”" reminded me of when I used to play chess as a kid. I would intensely focus on my plan three or four moves ahead, thinking I had it all figured out, totally blind to the forest, while my opponent would instantly snatch my queen.
In one of the recorded lectures, Kahneman gives an example of a fascinating experiment performed by some other researchers (whose names I don't remember). Subjects were told to watch a basketball game and count how many times the players passed the ball. While the game was going on, someone in a gorilla costume walked around the basketball court for a minute or so. When you watch the video, you absolutely cannot miss the gorilla. However, about a half of the subjects who were counting the passes have completely missed it.
protagonist wrote:My marriage was a bit like that too (hoping you are laughing...)
A marriage as a chess match beats a marriage in the presence of a gorilla.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:42 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
protagonist wrote:I'm not sure I get the fine distinction between "expert" and "heuristic" intuition. For example, if an "expert" pianist intuitively goes for a particular note, doesn't he do it "heuristically", i.e. based on years of experience, as well as "expertly"?(maybe I am using the term "heuristic" improperly).
I'd have to look it up, but I don't have the book handy at the moment.
I just did. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heuristic

I'm still not sure if I used it properly. What can you expect from a scientist? Taleb was right. We are useless.
Last edited by protagonist on Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:43 pm

protagonist wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:
protagonist wrote:I'm not sure I get the fine distinction between "expert" and "heuristic" intuition. For example, if an "expert" pianist intuitively goes for a particular note, doesn't he do it "heuristically", i.e. based on years of experience, as well as "expertly"?(maybe I am using the term "heuristic" improperly).
I'd have to look it up, but I don't have the book handy at the moment.

I just did. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heuristic

I'm still not sure if I used it properly. What can you expect from a scientist? We are useless.
Oh, I knew what heuristic was! I thought you were asking about the difference between the two manifestations of System 1. (I could make a joke about civil servants creating extra work for themselves, but that would be too painful at the moment.)

Victoria

P.S. LadyGeek has just revived an old thread announcing Kahneman's book.
Last edited by VictoriaF on Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:47 pm, edited 3 times in total.
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

hsv_climber
Posts: 3969
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 7:56 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by hsv_climber » Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:43 pm

Here is more info about heuristics vs expert:
We proposed that they used resemblance as a simplifying heuristic (roughly, a rule of thumb) to make a difficult judgment. The reliance on the heuristic caused predictable biases (systematic errors) in their predictions.
In particular, the accurate intuitions of experts are better explained by the effects of prolonged practice than by heuristics.
We have all heard such stories of expert intuition: the chess master who walks past a street game and announces “White mates in three” without stopping, or the physician who makes a complex diagnosis after a single glance at a patient. Expert intuition strikes us as magical, but it is not.
Above quotes are from the book.

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:50 pm

hsv_climber wrote:Here is more info about heuristics vs expert:
We proposed that they used resemblance as a simplifying heuristic (roughly, a rule of thumb) to make a difficult judgment. The reliance on the heuristic caused predictable biases (systematic errors) in their predictions.


Much different than Mirriam=Webster's definition, no?

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:07 pm

hsv_climber wrote:Here is more info about heuristics vs expert:
We proposed that they used resemblance as a simplifying heuristic (roughly, a rule of thumb) to make a difficult judgment. The reliance on the heuristic caused predictable biases (systematic errors) in their predictions.
In particular, the accurate intuitions of experts are better explained by the effects of prolonged practice than by heuristics.
We have all heard such stories of expert intuition: the chess master who walks past a street game and announces “White mates in three” without stopping, or the physician who makes a complex diagnosis after a single glance at a patient. Expert intuition strikes us as magical, but it is not.
Above quotes are from the book.

But the chess master could be said to have that "intuition", or the piano virtuoso could be said to pick the right note "intuitively", because those many years of practice involved experimentation, feedback, and trial-and-error until the chess master knew instantly which move was right or wrong, and the pianist always went to the "perfect" note. In my mind the distinction is not so black-and-white (if using Webster's def. of "heuristic" as I understand it.) A "rule of thumb" would potentially cause a bias, so if that is what heuristic means, then I see the distinction between heuristic and expert intuition. But I would think a component of "expertise" would be flexibility that can only be developed through years of experimentation, constant feedback, and trial-and-error...." (think of what Louis Armstrong could do differently than his predecessors with, say, John Philip Sousa ).

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:38 pm

protagonist wrote: In my mind the distinction is not so black-and-white (if using Webster's def. of "heuristic" as I understand it.)
A dictionary is not a good source of information about scientific terminology, because terms have a tendency to develop a life of their own. The best place to understand what heuristics means in the context of this discussion is the 1974 paper “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. This is one of the founding works of Behavioral Economics, together with the Prospect Theory and decisions under uncertainty.

Quoting myself again,
Victoria in another course paper wrote:The paper described three heuristics used to assess probabilities of various events and corresponding biases that distort decision making. The heuristics included representativeness, or “the probability that object A belongs to class B” based on “the degree to which A is representative of B” (p. 1124); availability, or the assessment “of the probability of an event by the ease with which instances or occurrences can be brought to mind” (p. 1127); and adjustment from an anchor, or making estimates by starting with an initial value and making adjustments (p. 1128). While the heuristics, or mental shortcuts, are legitimate means of decision making, the accompanying biases may lead to wrong conclusions. For example, in experiments subjects were asked to estimate the number of African countries in the United Nations by adjusting from an anchor provided by spinning a wheel of fortune. The subjects displayed a bias of insufficient adjustment by making lower or higher estimates of the number of countries when the number indicated on the wheel was respectively lower or higher.

In other experiments subjects had a bias of overestimating the probability of conjunctive events, i.e., by knowing the composition of a bag as 90% red marbles and 10% white marbles, they were betting that the probability of “drawing a red marble seven times in succession, with replacement” was higher than the probability of drawing a red marble from a bag that contained equal numbers of red and white marbles (p. 1129). The respective probabilities are 0.48 (which is 0.97) and 0.5, but the subjects have anchored on the initial high probability of the red marbles and did not sufficiently adjust. A companion bias of underestimating the probability of disjunctive events lead to subjects making wrong bets when they were asked about the probability of a red marble being drawn at least once in seven consecutive drawings with replacement in a scenario of a bag containing only 10% of red marbles.
These heuristics, i.e., representativeness, availability and adjustment from an anchor, are common for most people. Kahneman, Tversky, and scores of other psychologists conducted experiments that showed statistically significant trends. Heuristics are picked up unconsciously, as part of one's normal life. Expertise, on the other hand, requires deliberate practice. While you can use a random group of people to demonstrate their reliance on heuristics, you cannot expect that in a random group most subjects would be chess experts, or sax players, or Bogleheads.

The word "intuition" is applicable to both heuristics and expertise, but with important distinctions:
- Heuristical intuition is based on the experience of life; expert intuition is based on the experience of a particular area of expertise.
- Heuristical intuition can lead to wrong judgements or wrong decisions due to the biases associated with heuristics; expert intuition is a desired outcome of the years of practice and it usually helps making correct judgements and decisions.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

protagonist
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by protagonist » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:43 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
A dictionary is not a good source of information about scientific terminology, because terms have a tendency to develop a life of their own.
I tried to find other definition sources online for heuristics, because it is interesting that one term can have so many different interpretations. This from Collins English Dictionary:

heuristic [hjʊəˈrɪstɪk]
adj
1. helping to learn; guiding in discovery or investigation
2. (Social Science / Education) (of a method of teaching) allowing pupils to learn things for themselves
3. (Mathematics)
a. Maths Science Philosophy using or obtained by exploration of possibilities rather than by following set rules
b. Computing denoting a rule of thumb for solving a problem without the exhaustive application of an algorithm a heuristic solution


If I interpret it correctly, Kahneman (and you, as well as hsv_climber) are using definition 3b ("Computing" definition).

Your explanation of Kahneman makes sense to me now. Thanks.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:14 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:
Fallible wrote:Does anyone know of a transcript or taping of his speech?
I Googled for it but did not find anything except the Yale article cited by gatorking. Yale has a collection of videos; let's hope that Kahneman's lecture will be added to their archives soon.

Victoria
I did the obvious thing and wrote to the organizers asking whether and when the video of Daniel Kahneman's 2013 Arthur M. Okun Public Policy Lecture will be available. The response came back almost immediately:
It is not yet ready, but when it is, we will post an announcement on the Yale News channel.
Victoria
Kahneman's 2013 Arthur M. Okun Public Policy Lecture delivered on 20 February 2013, became available today on YouTube (link). It's 1h30m long.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:45 pm

VictoriaF wrote:...
Kahneman's 2013 Arthur M. Okun Public Policy Lecture delivered on 20 February 2013, became available today on YouTube (link). It's 1h30m long.

Victoria
Hi Victoria,

Thanks for posting this and I see Kahneman did go beyond what was reported in the Yale paper, i.e., editors also can, in effect, become System 1 by "recreating" stories that reporters submit. This was my earlier point, that the newsroom as cognitive model of Systems 1 and 2 goes only so far and that the overlap of the systems, which Kahneman writes about so beautifully in Thinking, Fast and Slow (and refers to in the speech as a "psychodrama between the two") is usually the reality. Reporters (System 1 in this model) can also have characteristics of System 2 when they know the story's subject far better than an editor could and they will have much say in the story's final outcome. I also have known some reporters to be more rational (System 2) than some editors. And on the reality goes, all of which, of course, Kahneman knows.

Elsewhere, I got a chuckle out of Kahneman's referring to his systems approach as "disreputable" and "contrary" to the rules of doing proper psychology (partly by endowing the systems with "skills, habits, etc.) because psychologists learn not to explain behavior by "little people in the head" and "I do that." Well, he is Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and he can do anything he wants, right? :)

Fallible
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:55 pm

Fallible wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:...
Kahneman's 2013 Arthur M. Okun Public Policy Lecture delivered on 20 February 2013, became available today on YouTube (link). It's 1h30m long.

Victoria
Hi Victoria,

Thanks for posting this and I see Kahneman did go beyond what was reported in the Yale paper, i.e., editors also can, in effect, become System 1 by "recreating" stories that reporters submit. This was my earlier point, that the newsroom as cognitive model of Systems 1 and 2 goes only so far and that the overlap of the systems, which Kahneman writes about so beautifully in Thinking, Fast and Slow (and refers to in the speech as a "psychodrama between the two") is usually the reality. Reporters (System 1 in this model) can also have characteristics of System 2 when they know the story's subject far better than an editor could and they will have much say in the story's final outcome. I also have known some reporters to be more rational (System 2) than some editors. And on the reality goes, all of which, of course, Kahneman knows.

Elsewhere, I got a chuckle out of Kahneman's referring to his systems approach as "disreputable" and "contrary" to the rules of doing proper psychology (partly by endowing the systems with "skills, habits, etc.) because psychologists learn not to explain behavior by "little people in the head" and "I do that." Well, he is Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and he can do anything he wants, right? :)

Fallible
Hi Fallible,

I also was amused by Kahneman's insights about psychology and characterizations of psychology in contrast with economics. It is interesting that economists strive on general theories, whereas psychologists are more focused on individuals and are "lucky" when they can make minor generalizations. Kahneman was also well disciplined not to take on answers for which he did not have a good answer. Whatever he may say, his System-2 was well tuned up during the Q&A part.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

Fallible
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by Fallible » Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:03 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Fallible wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:...

Hi Victoria,

Thanks for posting this and I see Kahneman did go beyond what was reported in the Yale paper, i.e., editors also can, in effect, become System 1 by "recreating" stories that reporters submit. This was my earlier point, that the newsroom as cognitive model of Systems 1 and 2 goes only so far and that the overlap of the systems, which Kahneman writes about so beautifully in Thinking, Fast and Slow (and refers to in the speech as a "psychodrama between the two") is usually the reality. Reporters (System 1 in this model) can also have characteristics of System 2 when they know the story's subject far better than an editor could and they will have much say in the story's final outcome. I also have known some reporters to be more rational (System 2) than some editors. And on the reality goes, all of which, of course, Kahneman knows.

Elsewhere, I got a chuckle out of Kahneman's referring to his systems approach as "disreputable" and "contrary" to the rules of doing proper psychology (partly by endowing the systems with "skills, habits, etc.) because psychologists learn not to explain behavior by "little people in the head" and "I do that." Well, he is Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and he can do anything he wants, right? :)

Fallible
Hi Fallible,

I also was amused by Kahneman's insights about psychology and characterizations of psychology in contrast with economics. It is interesting that economists strive on general theories, whereas psychologists are more focused on individuals and are "lucky" when they can make minor generalizations. ...
Yes, and didn't you like his comment early in the speech about economists thinking everyone is pretty much rational when one probably could look only so far as one's irrational spouse to know how true this is (or something close to that)?
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 18619
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Taleb and Kahneman: Antifragility vs. common-man attitud

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:09 pm

Fallible wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:
Fallible wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:...

Hi Victoria,

Thanks for posting this and I see Kahneman did go beyond what was reported in the Yale paper, i.e., editors also can, in effect, become System 1 by "recreating" stories that reporters submit. This was my earlier point, that the newsroom as cognitive model of Systems 1 and 2 goes only so far and that the overlap of the systems, which Kahneman writes about so beautifully in Thinking, Fast and Slow (and refers to in the speech as a "psychodrama between the two") is usually the reality. Reporters (System 1 in this model) can also have characteristics of System 2 when they know the story's subject far better than an editor could and they will have much say in the story's final outcome. I also have known some reporters to be more rational (System 2) than some editors. And on the reality goes, all of which, of course, Kahneman knows.

Elsewhere, I got a chuckle out of Kahneman's referring to his systems approach as "disreputable" and "contrary" to the rules of doing proper psychology (partly by endowing the systems with "skills, habits, etc.) because psychologists learn not to explain behavior by "little people in the head" and "I do that." Well, he is Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and he can do anything he wants, right? :)

Fallible
Hi Fallible,

I also was amused by Kahneman's insights about psychology and characterizations of psychology in contrast with economics. It is interesting that economists strive on general theories, whereas psychologists are more focused on individuals and are "lucky" when they can make minor generalizations. ...
Yes, and didn't you like his comment early in the speech about economists thinking everyone is pretty much rational when one probably could look only so far as one's irrational spouse to know how true this is (or something close to that)?
It was funny. My favorite statement was Kahneman's excuse of not having enough System-1 insights to answer one of the questions. I may use his trick, if I ever get to present my work.
Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

Post Reply