Monday, May 12, 2008
Question 3
In the prologue (xxii-xxiv) Taleb gives the story about the legislator who imposed locks on cockpit doors. He asks: “Who is more valuable, the politician who avoids a war or the one who starts a new one (and is lucky enough to win)?” How does this explain/represent American values, policies, rewards, etc. (or does it)? Can/should we change this?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think this represents human values, not just American values. Heroes have to face and overcome visible challenges to become heroes to others. People like this hypothetical legislator are worry-warts. (Is that a grandma term to use?) Going to war provides a more predictable circumstance to create a visible hero. It's human nature to want extraordinary occurrences - but we like predictable ones. The anticipation is half of the excitement.
I complain about airline security policy because I feel like there will always be something that the FAA hasn't thought of, and that it is impossible to predict all of the methods available to hi-jack a plane (the Black Swans). In the meantime there are all these stupid reactionary rules like not bringing any water onto a plane. The real risk to airplanes is not something that the FAA has a plan for. I think the risk mitigation we see is a large part a "narration" to ease the minds of millions of travelers. However, if everything is as risky and tenuous and unpredictable as Taleb says, then we do need these "narratives" in our a lives to keep things working well enough in between disasters.
Post a Comment