"The Black Swans" is a fascinating
book that amasses a huge and eclectic amount of empirical evidence. I had fun reading it, and I read it all: front cover to backcover. My most favorite sections in descending order were Glossary, Notes, and Bibliography. Such a preference probably identifies me as Mediocristani (citizen of Mediocristan) by nationality. While I''m very glad to know of the existence of a much better-off land called Extremistan, I''m not convinced of the
value of changing my citizenship - yet. What I like about Extremistan is that citizens of this land value the randomness, rarity, and unpredictability of outliers, and the enormous influences that
outliers have on the change and growth of everything important. The narrative and anecdotes of the book are amazing. There is really a basis for professional and personal growth here. Very
good books have always had two distinct effects on me. Some books are so good that all I can say is Wow. Others are so good that they make me want to write my own book - for or against. Reading "The Black Swans" has shown me a third effect that mixes the two. On one hand I''m wowed by the author''s reflective and knowledgeable attention to
things random and extreme. On the other hand the difference between the Extremistan and "Gaussistan" outlook on outliers is only a matter of emphasis and detail. It is not that Gaussians do not see the value of outliers (they do!), it is that apparently they understate the importance of outliers. It is seems like Extremistani have overemphasized their case. The overemphasis leads me to another concern. The book misses the reinforced and mutual interdependence between Mediocristan and Extremistan. According to this book Albert Einstein (both the person and the idea) was a Black Swan - correct. However, as a Black Swan Einstein was not unrelated to his ordinary parentage, for example. Outsiders saw Einstein disassembling Newtonian physics, Einstein himself viewed Newton as a foundation for his new edifice. An outlier, of course; isolated outlier, doubtful. The book also talks up "antiknowledge" and "antilibrary". That kind of talk is incomprehensible given the about of research that went into writing the book as evidenced by the amount of notes and bibliographic materials. What is the purpose of the book? Does the
author truly expect his readers to not learn anything from the book? Am I really worse-off for having read this book? In this respect I wished the author followed his own counsel that it is both easier and funner to knock down things than to put them together. Having said all that, I still recommend this book, with a caviat that it is not antiknowledge and antilibrary; it is pro-knowledge and belongs in libraries.
More reviews about the The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable