Nassim Taleb Talks Antifragile, Libertarianism, and Capitalism's Genius for Failure
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 พ.ค. 2024
- Nassim Nicholas Taleb is a former trader and hedge fund manager, a best-selling author, and a groundbreaking theorist on risk and resilience.
Taleb drew wide attention after the 2007 publication of The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, which warned that our institutions and risk models aren't designed to account for rare and catastrophic events. Among other things, the book cautioned that oversized and unaccountable banks using flawed investment models could bring on a financial crisis. He also warned that the government-sanctioned housing finance agencies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, were sitting on a "barrel of dynamite."
One year after The Black Swan was published, a global banking crisis was brought on by the very factors he identified.Nassim Nicholas Taleb (PHOTO CREDIT: Sarah Josephine)
Taleb doesn't identify as a libertarian, but he often sounds like one. He has argued that we need to build a society where major actors have "skin in the game" and our public intellectuals can bloviate without subjecting the rest of us to the consequences of their bad ideas. He supported Ron Paul in the 2012 presidential election and has cited the libertarian economist Friedrich Hayek as an influence.
Taleb has called New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman "vile and harmful" and coined the phrase the "Stiglitz Syndrome" after Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, which refers to the phenomenon of public intellectuals being held utterly unaccountable for their bad predictions. Paul Krugman and Paul Samuelson are among Taleb's other Nobel laureate bête noires.
Antifragile: Things That Gain from DisorderTaleb's new book is Antifragile: Things that Gain with Disorder, which argues that in order to create robust institutions we must allow them to build resilience through adversity. The essence of capitalism, he argues, is encouraging failure, not rewarding success.
Reason's Nick Gillespie sat down with Taleb for a wide-ranging discussion about why debt leads to fragility (5:16); the importance of "skin in the game" to a properly functioning financial system (10:45); why large banks should be nationalized (21:47); why technology won't rule the future (24:20); the value of studying the classics (26:09); his intellectual adversaries (33:30); why removing things is often the best way to solve problems (36:50); his intellectual influences (39:10); why capitalism is more about disincentives than incentives (43:10); why large, centralized states are prone to fail (44:50); his libertarianism (47:30); and why he'll never take writing advice from "some academic at Cambridge who sold 2,200 copies" (51:49).
Produced by Jim Epstein; camera by Epstein and Anthony L. Fisher.
Approximately 56 minutes.
Go to reason.com/reasontv/2013/01/20... for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason TV's TH-cam Channel to receive automatic updated when new material goes live.
Taleb is visibly envigoured by something that day, delighted with the interview, and with the back-and-forth free-flowing 'interruptive' dialectic. This is one of the only interviewers to whom I've seen Taleb respond with this level of delight. Gillispie showed great intelligence in his questions and feedback. _Both_ interrupted each other, in the productive, intense way, and both got to say lots. That's what a real conversation is about!
Nassim Taleb is my hero. He is a true renaissance man.
I enjoy him also
pathetic
Nassim is rough around the edges, but that is a good thing. People are a bit too polite, I should think.
Yes
Taleb's ideas have profound implications for libertarian philosophy. Libertarians have focused most of their criticism on large centralised government as a threat to individual freedom and private property, but Taleb's ideas suggest that centralization in any form, including corporate consolidation, presents major problems for society at large. Large corporations present a unique challenge to libertarian philosophy because a seemingly private endeavour may also threaten individual liberty and private property.
Unless it's tech. Did you catch that conundrum? He's anti-intellectual in many ways. Notice his hubris; no one has experienced an independent though save for him...and maybe Nietsche. Listen to the interview again. Plenty of holes and logical fallacies to be had.
"That which doesn't kill you; makes you stronger." Or as Taleb says; "Anti-Fragile". He's as intellectually deep as Malcolm Gladwell; and their supporters are equally annoying with their incessant defense of their vapid, self-important priests.
Gillespie used Taleb's own wishy washy rules to stump him multiple times in the interview. Hilarious.
Maybe you should have taken the time to listen. What I heard him say was the companies like Google, even though they are very large, if they fail, the will be replaced. While something like the banking system, does in fact become to big to fail. If it fails, the whole system fails and the consequences are great. If you don't think the owners and leaders of the large bank knows this, then you are crazy. They want to increase the consequences if they fail, not decrease them. They want large upsides with minimal downsides. How does anyone justify the bonuses that were paid out to the executives at those banks that we bailed out. That is what is called hubris.
sorry jeff, didn't notice any hubris there, just a whole lot of defensiveness on your part.
The idea that concentrated power and authority of any kind is illegitimate and should be dismantled is actually the original basis of the libertarian philosophy.
It’s fairly new version of that started in the US, that’s Pro-Business/corporate power and solely Anti-government. So called “anarcho-capitalists”.
There’s a rich history of thinkers and works that began as an off-shoot of socialism and anarchism.
@@BlakeBjornstad1 As far as I know, Ancaps do not inherently support huge centralized corporations because they do not believe such are possible in free market capitalism.
Nassim Taleb is one person that alone can through education of fellow humans save the human civilization by making it anti-fragile. I only wish he did more interviews as each one is an amazing feast for mind and soul. He is an amazing person going after the establishment. I wish more people had a courage/knowledge/integrity like him.
"A polyglot, Taleb has a literary fluency in English, French, and classical Arabic; a conversational fluency in Italian and Spanish; and can read classical texts in Greek, Latin, Aramaic, and ancient Hebrew, as well as the Canaanite script." Goddamn!
One of this century's greatest thinkers.. Philosophical is an understatement
Nice interview, except that the interviewer kept interrupting. Rather annoying.
Nick Gillespie is generally rather annoying.
he obviously wanted to give him some of his own potion back
There are 2 things - the interviewer wanted to show he know things and he was stopping Taleb at exact points the interviewer did not agree on in order not to be later developed
Always a pleasure to listen to Taleb, thank you!
This interviewers career seems pretty fragile...
hahaha
10/10
Insufferable. Shut the fuck up.dude
As most interviewers thinking it's about them
arghh, the irony.
Always great to listen to Nassim. I did not like how the interviewer kept interrupting him at critical moments though.
Thank you Reason, I asked for longer videos and here one is, the voluntary sector provides!
Wow there is a lot of information packed into this guy.I am going to have to watch this at least one more time and get his books too.These are some ideas I have never heard before. and they are non stop
Thankyou. Thought provoking content. Excellent and this type of content is exactly what problem solvers need 👍
The conductor doesn't let Nassim finish his ideas. He doesn't know how to ask and stop at the right moment.
From what I have seen of him so far, he is always nervous and never really has enough time to elaborate sufficiently. He compensates for this by often adlibbing about things that he doesn't distill into his writing. I don't think anyone could honestly say he is articulate. Probably it's from too much coffee :)
l0k1 verloren are you referring to Nassim? Fair enough. I've had sort of the same observations of him, but Edward J Diaz' (OP's) critique was of the Gillespie, the interviewer. Cheers
The book is called Antifragile not Antifragility!
Hahaha don't you love that Taleb has so little ego in that regard that he does't correct him once?
scratchfg212 Good point about the ego!
I've always felt that way in my life of always reading what I wanted to read. Resonate with this idea in more than 10000 ways. Maybe this is why I liked options and mathematics so much and still love the classics.
Thoroughly enjoyed this interview.
Great interview. Thanks!
Well its about time yall got NNT on ReasonTV!
Thanks a bunch, I've the NNT"s 'black swan' about 20 times.
I've read a bit (some more than others) about and of both the classics, the stoics, John Kenneth Galbraith, Joseph Stiglitz, philosophy, John Stuart Mill and all the rest, and to me he was very clear given the short time an interview affords you. But granted, it becomes and IS unclear if you cant follow or do not have some insights into all of this and can fill out and somehow at least interpret and fill in some of the things he refers to. Other than that I can agree with you on a lot, except I didn't think he was mumbling, but I guess it depends on several different factors, from audio to volume levels, experience with foreign accents etc.
I got a lot out of it I think, not only association and inspiration to read more and so on, but synthesizing so much knowledge takes a lot of work when summarizing so short and still attempting to be succinct.
But I'm of the opinion that ALL interviewers should spend 2-3 days with a person, go on walks and get longer logically coherent rationales out of their subjects.
0:25 he got the single-word book title wrong.
Great video the guy interviewing did a fabulous job
Thank you Nassim Taleb
Excellent conversation.
I have watched any number of Reason TV interviews with Nick have always enjoyed them. I have to say you were off your game in this interview. I would love to have heard what Nassim had to say and what he was thinking but didn't feel like I had the opportunity here.
I read his paper in 2019 of option pricing it is a masterpiece, A model which needs only to estimate 1 parameter and uses market prices to find theorical prices. Just briliant.
Refreshing candour
Really got to read his whole book, I've seen him on shows and read his articles but I haven't gone all the way!
Some have posted that they don't care for Taleb's delivery. Weather or not one agrees with this his books are impressive in content and beautifully written. On YT there is an excerpt of Black Swan: go and have a listen.
Nick, when the man starts a list, let him at least finish the list. Thanks. What this man is saying, whether we like it or not, is particularly relevant to our time.
good to have a few of these longer more interesting videos
Great conservation!
I love the bit "they realized negative information is more important than positive information." I've invested in Tesla (btw it's August 2020 Tesla-mania!) I spent a couple of focused weeks trying to figure out all the ways Tesla could blow up, be eclipsed by the competition, etc, etc... I felt more confident after this. However the price just kept climbing. Sure it's great, and I've even seen this before with Apple (for most of the past 15 years) (Apple and now Tesla just seem to be completely obvious. I'm sure Taleb can think of ten reasons I may be completely wrong.)
When I was a kid people would tell me that I was too negative, too doubtful. A high school teacher, very wise, said I was cynical - in both senses. So I developed the idea that so long as you can take care of all the ways that something can go wrong, fix all the mistakes...after that you can accomplish great things. It took me another year or two to figure out the cynics were stoics and I'd been one all along.
Good stuff. Thanks.
The guy asking questions does not comprehend the book and won't stop interrupting... Annoying. But funny ;)))
ur profile pic :-)
I hate the type of interviewer who never shuts but this guy is even worse. He keeps interrupting at all the wrong places.
@@squarerootof2 Nick really blew it. He's more than irritating. He should have just shut up and allowed Taleb to finish his thought.
The interviewer is pretty switched on. I'm impressed. Able to Keep up with Taleb
Only able to watch this interview because of Naseem's views...
What does not kill me makes me stronger...
The problem with 'domain generality' is that it neglects intuition (fluency) and associative potential developed across multiple sub-fields, which in almost in any way imaginable (abstract, practical, creative), can be useful at some arbitrary point in time we cannot predict. Domain specificity(s) is what allows us to converge onto a novel idea which is grounded on the products made through associations of concepts, between distinct fields such as, for example, physics and mathematics (e.g for using the concept of a mathematical point to invent the notion of discrete matter). In effect, those who advocate domain generality, believe it's better to a be well rounded bum who gets his hands wet a little faster, than to be a master of a single field, or an apprentice in multiple fields. And while, in practice, this may generally be to the benefit of the American corporation - that type of argument against domain-specificity doesn't win on philosophical grounds. The arguments against domain-generality is self-evident, and have existed since the ancients, beginning with Aristotle's empiricism. That being said, the likes of Taleb (including Dean Coneman (pun-intended)) are simply anti-empirical pests who are advocates for our society of corporate fat cats, degenerates, stamped with ink; entitlement minded anti-intellectuals, who prefer to boast big numbers (IQ) and indulge in their grandiose sense of intellectual worth, and who as physicist Sean Carroll says, "believe they can sit on the couch sipping scotch, and understand the universe".
good stuff!!!
one of the best Reason vids ever
great post
God this was such an awesome interview
47:10 small states love commerce, large states love war
47:10
Echoes of Herbert Spencer. Not many people read Spencer these days, but Nassim Taleb's argument for what he calls "antifragility" is very similar to Spencer's evolutionary model of business.
The man is as close to genius as we have around at the moment.
Great stuff..
taleb in his prime - always good to reread his thoughts on life
Is this available in podcast form? I'd love to listen on the road. Thanks, Nick
I think that big tech corporations do play a large part in creating fragility because they create attention marketplaces which disproportionately reward big companies at the expense of small companies. They allow big companies with large advertising budgets to monopolize important marketing channels and to drown out small competitors before they have a chance to compete. So while technology may not itself be a fragile industry, it can add fragility to other industries which it serves by funneling all of the world's attention to a handful of big companies. I think that technology companies have played a key role in the centralization of the economy and its fragility.
Taleb is a treasure!
-dlj.
*****
Also his interpretation of stock market economics is sound, imho.
-dlj.
Great !!!
There is lot of critique for the interviewer for his interruptions.
I was grateful for them. I did not read the book and I'm not familiar with the concepts Nassim mentioned and was ready to fire away another dozen of them b4 he got interrupted/interviewed.
Well, I'm going to look for some other interview with Taleb. These are some interesting things he got cut off from saying.
I like Nick's active interviewing. For us mere mortals Mr Taleb has many fascinating ideas cloaked in dense intellectual & technical concepts. His writing could be much more accessible with good editing, for which he apparently has no patience. Good stuff.
Great interview and Nassim Taleb is a true thinker. However, there is a word for something or someone who benefits or gains from volatility or chaos - you could call it 'Agile' rather than Antifragile. An organisation that is Agile can put in place approaches that enable it to develop responses that gain from mistakes / errors / volatility.
there's nothing thoughtful or useful about a "knee-jerk" reaction, which is why it is called called knee jerk ie involuntary. Agility is all about learning from diversity, errors and stress and actually putting in place processes and systems to deal with such in the future. Hence I don't object to the word Antifragile .. I just think it's unnecessarily complex... Makes for a good discussion though.
He is the man!
Great guy
30:58 "..whatever change you are going to do needs to be incremental and should reduce the adverse consequences of it
And you don't believe your ideas, you only believe what you see"
"People are harmed first by their own mistakes."
Great interview, and good ideas. So many things appear to be floating in his head that he speaks rather fast, which I think diminishes his presentation skills.
Taleb is so right he doesn't know where to start
This is an interview not a lecture.... a two way exchange. if you just want the monologue version then just read his books. Interesting to see how the great man reacts to the questions/interruptions... good questions or not.
I stopped watching because of the interviewer.
A correction: Kharazmi was a Persian polymath who produced vastly influential works in mathematics, astronomy, and geography.
38:00 I have some family members in medicine who have said the same thing over dinner.
Self-ordering is the default model. We don't have to adopt it, we just have to stop interfering. Hence 'via negativa.'
Nice that the narrative is signposted in the description. Ideas would have flowed better without so many banal interruptions from interviewer.
the interviewer want to show something, he better shut up and don't interfere.
It's called an interview not a speech.
but at least let him try to finish his sentence first mo O .
Syukri Ali then it's not an interview
If you watched just an hour long video of free-flowing ideas and your only comment is on the interviewer, you lack intelligence. He intervened so as to help nassim clarify his convictions and helped satisfy many of the questions I had as well.
its their 2 mins of fame. Journalist cannot do anything themselves so they behave like they know everything.
Nick Gillespie usually does a fine job of conducting interviews. However, for some reason, he utterly makes a complete and utter hash of this one. One feels that faced with a Taleb, Gillespie feels the urge to demonstrate his own knowledge. And that gets in the way of the viewer being able to fully comprehend what Taleb is getting at with each point because Gillespie feels compelled to "put in his oar" and take the conversation in a different direction over and over again. This leads to a frustrating cycle of "point-interruption-different point- interruption-different point-interruption" that makes the viewer feel like he/she's attached to the back of a grasshopper who has been injected with caffeine. We land for just a moment, and, then....off we go again. And this pattern is unrelenting for the entire hour. I suggest that Gillespie have Taleb come back for another interview, if he'll agree to risk to be subjected to this again, and this time, consider that the viewer is tuning in to hear Taleb expound on HIS views and merely facilitate that process instead of becoming an obstacle to it.
Very well worded, Val!
Actually, Taleb is visibly delighted with the interview, and with the back-and-forth free-flowing 'interruptive' dialectic. This is one of the only interviewers to whom I've seen Taleb respond with this level of delight. Gillispie showed great intelligence in his questions and feedback. _Both_ interrupted each other, in the allowed way. That's what a real conversation is about!
27:44 Nick has a bumptious style that is off-putting. He may be blind to it; most are who act that way, in my experience.
Bonus should be based on ethics in relation to the environment, community and the workers you employ
The name of the book is "Antifragile," not "Antifragility," for Nietzsche's sake!
I agree, city states are very sucessful. They tend to last longer that nation states.
I read even some city states were more active. Compare the Venetian oligarchy built on monopoly & usery& war vs. Florence a city of risk taking banking family Medici. Where the Renaissance began.
Interesting.
Esse aqui é Rei absoluto graças a Alã ou a Oxalá, Deus. Assimetria é grande!
🙏🙏🙏
Frankly, I think it's less familiarity with his work (though that would certainly help) and more the viewer's facility with English. Despite his accent, Taleb possesses an immense vocabulary, and his use of language is highly precise and succinct, not the mention frequently technical. I suspect that many - even those who speak English natively - have difficulty understanding him at his natural speech rate. I suspect this accounts for the varying opinions on whether Nick needed to STFU.
Mr. N. Gillespie, there are too many interruptions by you during this interview, I suggest you let your interviewee talk more and draw out pertinent information from him. Only interrupt when he/she strays away from your question. My guess you interrupt just to get more info, why NOT ask him to return for another interview in order to ask him about other aspects of his ideas. Just a suggestion or a criticism, take it as it seems fit to your idea of an interview.
Another idea would be to reform the bankruptcy laws,so that the executives have to disgorge all bonuses ,and can keep only an amount of money provided by a legally mandated schedule enshrined in the bankruptcy act.
The quality of this interview is astonishing. Kudos to the interviewer.
Ghazali was a Persian and born in Tous Iran and died in iran I 111 ce and wrote in Arabic. And he was not and an Arab
Just to keep history correct. However I like your books and your view of life
Let's give Webber some credit.
It isn't the lack of "creative destruction" (Schumpeter/Marx) in Financial Services that is the problem, it is pursuit of strategies of "destructive creation" as part of the high growth/high leverage, failed banking model, that has led to self-similarity and fragility across scales within the banking and wider financial system. Blog: fitforrandomness
Agreed but I also think its important that you call it as you see it. We can have an academic discussion about "destructive creation" but it would remain just that...academic. This is greed, ignorance and a lack of ethics...call out it for what it is.
Taleb is a ron paul supporter. God only men of reason support that guy. Shows us how far we've come as a species in our ability to reason. I'd say 1% of the population knows reason while the rest know nothing other then how to yell and complain about EVERYTHING!!!!!!
"The FAA figured out that technology makes flying less safe."
**Boeing didn't like that**
actually not only can you not control randomness, but you actually can't control how you behave - the random genetic predispositions have already determined how you would behave under given circumstances...
Is there a transcript for this?
Debt and centralized systems are synonymous ; decentralized systems and debt are antonyms.
No bank is too big to fail. Fiat money and regulation is the real problem. We need private money and free markets where banks are allowed to fail.
What’s the story about the note on his dinner table?
The interviewer is beyond ill-equipped to handle Taleb's very sophisticated point of view and is even somewhat petulant and insulting.
It's is funny how the same people can listen to the same thing but come to such radically different conclusions. First I think Taleb's ideas are very interesting and I will explore them in more detail. At the same time, I didn't have any issues with the interview. I thought is was quite good overall. It was over 55 minutes long and don't usually make a practice out of throwing away 55 minutes of my life unless I think I think that I might benefit from it some how. In this case, I came away with some new thoughts that I want to explore more as well as explore the author and his other works. You seem to be a fan of Taleb. If this interview got people like myself to want to find out more, then wasn't the interview a success?
17:10 working for the government should not be an investment strategy!
17:03
"Organic" is EXACTLY the right word.
The interviewer is extremely rude, he doesn't miss a chance to interrupt Taleb.
Wow. One can only wonder how long before Taleb is censored, memory holed and turned into an un-person. The lack of consequences for one's actions, which is fundamental for corruption to flourish, is now systemically pervasive throughout the U.S. It permeates virtually all areas of life. Watching the movie "Joker" one is faced with the general population's appreciation of an artistic expression of common experience for millions. The diatribes from the "authorities" against Joker, appear as confirmation of the movie. I know they don't realize this. They can't. They don't have skin in the game. As such they are willfully protecting their intellectual fortress from which they are simultaneously behaving with moral superiority coupled with horrifying hypocrisy. It is genuinely stomach turning.
Nassim is a genius
Goldmine!!
Come to Bulgaria. We have cheap and high quality private hospitals like the Japanese Tokuda.
Guy is an intellectual, no doubt about that.
You're being too hard on Nick. I have a tremendous respect for Taleb, and have been following his work for a long time, so I can understand why you found Nick annoying, but the fact is not many people know Taleb's work on more than a superficial level, so it helps when you have an interviewer asking the "annoying" questions because that's how people new to Taleb's idea would approach it. Nick did a great job for what is goal was, which appeared to be to introduce Taleb to readers of Reason.
Sherlock Holmes used "remove what you can and what remains is closer to the truth." Sometimes what remains is one fact, the smoking gun.