I have a weakness for popular factual books, the kind presented as having a "big idea" or strong theme in any semi-scientific area of knowledge. This week's reading is "The Black Swan" - I've been intrigued for a while, and it has become topical again.
And I find it is one of the quite rare books that has me nodding at regular intervals and, if I was the kind of person who wrote in books, I would be underlining points quite often too. Like I saw people doing to Brethren ministry in the past. (Tangentially, the kind of brethren who leave their weekly ministry visible to visitors tend to be the kind who underline and take notes, although I wouldn't cynically want to say the two habits are connected.) Although this book is somewhat overstated in its tone, it chimes with my own outlook on life and makes me wonder why other people haven't said the same things so clearly and vocally.
The central message is that prediction is a human weakness that leads to trouble, because few things that matter are predictable and those that are predictable are swamped by other unforeseen circumstances anyway. That feels right to me. I'm forever hedging my bets because what seems obvious to others looks rather fragile to me, and yet wondering why I'm out of step.
However, there is a big irony here, and it's the main reason I mention the point at all. One of the central points the author makes about the limits of knowledge, and consequently of prediction, is about confirmation bias: the human tendency to fasten on information that fits with what one already knows or thinks while ignoring contrary facts. Here is a book that tells me I'm right to be conscious of the weakness of knowledge. So what's the use of that?
1 comment:
This is a huge subject, combining chaos theory, the fallibility of inductive reasoning, the questionable rationality of inductive reasoning, Hempel’s paradox and human psychology. I think the subject is as important as it is huge.
In science there is an obvious need to be aware of the weakness of knowledge. It is part of a scientist’s job to measure the weakness or strength of each new bit of scientific knowledge, but the same skill is useful to everyone in everyday life. Judges and juries weigh and interpret evidence, while politicians and advertising agents often present evidence to the public, along with their interpretation of it, some with the intention to inform, some with the intention to deceive. Whatever their intention, I think they will find books like this useful. So will the public if they don’t want to be conned.
Post a Comment