1.6 KiB
id, aliases, title, tags
| id | aliases | title | tags | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| _Fooled by Randomness_ |
|
Fooled by Randomness
This is the commentary companion to taleb_2001_fooled-by-randomness.
Critiques
"Logic Without Statistics"
FbR uses few citations, relying on the strength of Taleb's logic alone, by his own stating.
Taleb argues this strategy is perfectly legitimate, which is true, but it does not follow that it makes for the most robust argument. In recent editions of the text, Taleb claims that his editors have implored him to provide figures, graphs, studies, etc. as---he agrees---would be expected for any similar book on statistical phenomena, but he refuses.
I don't find this approach charming at all, especially considering how critical Taleb is of demagogues.
Juxtaposing FbR with hubbard_2020_failure, which is a more traditional work of statistical thought, well researched, and with a thorough bibliography, Taleb's arguments are considerably less satisfying. When Hubbard is wrong, it's clear his interpretation is flawed in that instance, when Taleb is wrong, I question the foundation of all his arguments. Less politely, I wonder why I'm listening to him just make up justifications for what he already believed.
Qualitative Probability
Taleb loses me in the introduction when he states that he defines probability qualitatively.
hubbard_2020_failure gives a comprehensive history of the terms uncertainty, probability, and risk,
Later it's clear he what he means by probability is uncertainty.