Quotes from Nassim Nicholas Taleb

formation of moral values in society doesn't come from the evolution of the consensus. No, it is the most intolerant person who imposes virtue on others precisely because of that intolerance.

English "manners" were imposed on the middle class as a way of domesticating them, along with instilling in them the fear of breaking rules and violating social norms.

Convincing - and confident - disciplines, say, physics, tend to use little statistical backup, while political science and economics, which have never produced anything of note, are full of elaborate statistics and statistical "evidence" (and you know that once you remove the smoke, the evidence is not evidence).

You don't become completely free just by avoiding to be a slave; you also need to avoid becoming a master.

So I disagree with the followers of Marx and and those of Adam Smith: the reason free markets work is because they allow people to be lucky, thanks to aggressive trial and error, not by giving rewards or incentives for skill. The strategy is, then, to tinker as much as possible and try to collect as many Black Swan opportunities as you can.

Heroes are heroes because they are heroic in behavior, not because they won or lost. Patrocles does not strike us as a hero because of his accomplishments (he was rapidly killed) but because he preferred to die than see Achilles sulking into inaction. Clearly, the epic poets understood invisible histories. Also later thinkers and poets had more elaborate methods for dealing with randomness, as we will see with stoicism.

A good book gets better on the second reading. A great book on the third. Any book not worth rereading isn't worth reading.

A mathematician thinks in numbers, a lawyer in laws, and an idiot thinks in words.

It seemed, wrote Machiavelli, that in the midst of murders and civil wars, our republic became stronger [and] its citizens infused with virtues. … A little bit of agitation gives resources to souls and what makes the species prosper isn't peace, but freedom.

The principle of intervention, like that of healers, is first do no harm (primum non nocere); even more, we will argue, those who don't take risks should never be involved in making decisions.

Don't complain too loud about wrongs done you; you may give ideas to your less imaginative enemies.

we have evidence that collectively society doesn't advance with organized education, rather the reverse: the level of (formal) education in a country is the result of wealth.

Please, don't drive a school bus blindfolded.

Religion isn't so much about telling man that there is one God as about preventing man from thinking that he is God.

I suspect that they put Socrates to death because there is something terribly unattractive, alienating, and nonhuman in thinking with too much clarity.

In other words, history teaches us to avoid the brand of naive empiricism that consists of learning from casual historical facts.

If you ever do have to heed a forecast, keep in mind that its accuracy degrades rapidly as you extend it through time.

But they never notice the following inconsistency: this so-called worst-case event, when it happened, exceeded the worst case at the time.

What should we control? As a rule, intervening to limit size (of companies, airports, or sources of pollution), concentration, and speed are beneficial in reducing Black Swan risks.

Having an assistant (except for the strictly necessary) removes your soul from the game.

You view the world from within a model.

Yes, an intolerant minority can control and destroy democracy. Actually, it will eventually destroy our world. So, we need to be more than intolerant with some intolerant minorities. Simply, they violate the Silver Rule. It is not permissible to use "American values" or "Western principles" in treating intolerant Salafism (which denies other peoples' right to have their own religion). The West is currently in the process of committing suicide.

Most people fear being without audiovisual stimulation because they are too repetitive when they think and imagine things on their own.

How do you innovate? First, try to get in trouble. I mean serious, but not terminal, trouble. I hold—it is beyond speculation, rather a conviction—that innovation and sophistication spark from initial situations of necessity, in ways that go far beyond the satisfaction of such necessity (from the unintended side effects of, say, an initial invention or attempt at invention).