Taleb's persona, however, does not lend itself well to open debate over such issues, as he champions himself as being a lone iconoclast against the "IYIs". All we can do is enjoy the show, I guess.
Agreed -- it's a bullshit attempt to re-write history.
> why, in the current day, history needs to be rewritten to be completely fictitious.
For example complaining the recent Dunkirk film has mostly white men in it... when that was true of the historical event it depicts.
But I did want to point out that a lot of The Black Swan - was about berating "other economists and their flawed theories". I feel he tries a lot to make it clear that he isn't an economist...
But I haven't read enough books on economics to know if this is what all economists like doing to each other.
PS: I really enjoyed that book and tried to absorb many lessons from it, but I gotta say "pop-risk" is a funny nickname for it.
its not different than the way the left attacks people as: racist, homophobe, mysangist, uneducated, hillbilly, etc.
the last one i find quite interesting, a party that is supposed to stand against stereotypes, labeling, and skin color references uses hillbilly / red neck a lot.
I do agree it is not a real rebuttal if the other side has a point unrelated to their bigotry.
As ever, calling people names just gets you universally thought of as an idiot.
So don't do it.
2) Anything bigoted is unacceptable.
3) Anything I find unacceptable should be beaten down with ad hominim attacks instead of properly heard out and debated.
Got it.
If someone actually is racist. Not if someone is merely disagreeing with SJWs.
It should not be something we make a knee-jerk reaction on. Real racism should be opposed and we should find a way to persuade people that playing the delicate snowflake victim card is also not appropriate.
How can you square this logically?
Taleb blasts the nature and tone of the argument, concluding "scholarship is dead in the UK,"(https://medium.com/incerto/something-is-broken-in-the-uk-int...) but the irony is that if it's ending, it's ending in part because of behavior such as his.
I actually agree in general with his perspective on the cartoon, but found his behavior unacceptable. The other side of the argument isn't unreasonable, even if you conclude it's maybe not the best side of the argument.
In some ways it doesn't matter, but I'm getting tired of the right setting up this dynamic where they engage in ad hominem bullshit, and then act offended when other side responds. I say this as someone who often identifies with the right--it's alienating and pushes reasonable people away. Rather than apologizing about not being respectful of Professor Beard, he becomes defensive and somehow tries to rationalize it.
Next time Taleb, could you please just take the high road in your behavior? Even if the other side is totally full of shit, and acting inappropriately, you'll look better and everyone will win by being the better one. I even agree with you and you've turned me off of your own damn arguments.
Jeez.