He's a smart guy, so he's no doubt fully aware of all the people you mention. He's also equally aware that he sells more books than all those people combined by probably a couple of order of magnitude.
Understanding > Knowledge
Taleb hammer is economists. All his nails are defined by that hammer. Yes, it's one way of trying to manage thoughts about the __complex__ world around us. But it's not complete. It doesn't always work. That hammer has blindspots.
You'd think Taleb would know this as well. But his hammer doesn't change. The least he can do, as every good argument should, is to mention the blindspots and how others might have insights. He leaves that out of the picture.
Given Taleb's theory...ironic, huh?
Gives zero fucks his arguments are not arguments at all. What a shame.
Yeah Gladwell. Comes up with a theory, then cherry-picks for studies that support it, but never mentions anything that doesn't.
What is your specific bone to pick with Taleb?
Ultimately, you're just spewing bullshit, and in many cases just trying to use to reputation as a (cheap) substitute for truth and fact. Again, such intellectual laziness should not be rewarded.
I'm not sure why we're grown so tolerant and accepting of what so often amounts to raw bullshit.
That's often an indicator that the content has been made inaccurate in the direction that people want to hear.
For those actually interested in this stuff, beyond Taleb's stand-up routines, look up the work of Kurt Lewin, Stanley Milgram, Solomon Asch, Phil Zambrado or Mel Slater. It's much more thought provoking.
These are very interesting times, because we finally have tons of data on how groups form, grow, break, merge etc And the ongoing merger of social psychology, political science, network theory as seen in the emergence of computational social science depts, doesn't just tell us how things work, but how to change and regulate the behavior and actions of groups. Early days but full of promise.