On the other hand, it also seems that Taleb’s ethical basis is very traditional. He admits to be a faithful follower of the Orthodox Church, and shows no desire to be in the least critical of its metaphysical rigidities. It seems rather odd that he can blame scientists for cherry-picking data but not priests for cherry-picking the Bible, and react strongly to economic bigwigs who unethically subject others to risks, whilst apparently letting off the Church, which has been doing exactly the same thing through its tithing systems from many centuries. Taleb rightly identifies ways that tradition can be antifragile, and organically develop responses to a variety of conditions that are far more effective in the long-term than rationalised interventions. However, he seems blind to the metaphysical dogmas that also often accompany tradition, and the fragility and exploitation that often accompany these dogmas.
via ‘Antifragile’ by Nassim Nicholas Taleb | Middle Way Society.
HatTip to Dave Lull.
Preferring the time-tested short-comings of “old” religion over “new” post-Enlightenment rationalism is not a curious by-product, oversight or inconsistency, but perhaps the perfect example of how Taleb thinks the world should work. There is a lot to criticize in a 1500 year-old religion, but we know from experience that someone can make all the apparent errors of doctrine, practice, ideology etc and still live a good life. It’s not so clear the other way.