4 ms·
> That's Taleb, trying to be an expert on everything. It might be worth it to provide an overview of Taleb: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb
by amyjess 9y ago
> That's Taleb, trying to be an expert on everything.
It might be worth it to provide an overview of Taleb: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb
While he's had some good ideas, such as black swan theory, he also has a long history of inadvertently having his theories contradict each other, promoting junk science, denying actual science, and calling his critics "retards" on Twitter.
- pc2g4d 9y agoThat article comes across as one massive ad hominem attack against the guy. It's fine if there's a "Controversy" section, but it's practically the whole article. There's just a little section at the end called "Notable contributions", but the massive first section ("Questionable activity") dominates---not to mention casts judgement on everything. It was my first exposure to RationalWiki. Color me unimpressed. I'm all for skepticism, but it seems RationalWiki has a very particular agenda, as if the answers are all decided. The Wikipedia article strikes a better balance, in my opinion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb
- amyjess 9y agoThe whole point of RationalWiki is that it's a callout site. RationalWiki is first and foremost a well-documented list of science deniers and pseudoscience pushers. Neutrality is counter to its goal.