3 ms·
Both views could be correct: Taleb's point is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I haven't read Sapiens, and I hope Harari is correct, but I'
by crwalker 8y ago
Both views could be correct: Taleb's point is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
I haven't read Sapiens, and I hope Harari is correct, but I'm not tracking the second argument. Certain governments believe they can conquer minds, as evidenced by detention/propaganda camps and universal surveillance/scoring. If a government with this perspective successfully invaded another country, wouldn't they institute a similar program there and expect similar results?
- ntsplnkv2 8y ago> If a government with this perspective successfully invaded another country, wouldn't they institute a similar program there and expect similar results? No country of consequence can be invaded like this today - nuclear weapons upped the stakes considerably.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> No country of consequence can be invaded like this today - nuclear weapons upped the stakes considerably. No nuclear power can be, nor can any country closely allied with a nuclear power, but not every country of consequence is in one of those categories. Unless you define “of consequence” specifically to mean in those two categories, and so exclude, e.g., Ukraine.