Talk:Black swan theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

[edit] First Paragraph Suggested Re-write

The wording of this section is confusing - the sentence about 9/11 as well as the inferred link to Australia don't flow.

Current Text:
The event most commonly considered a black swan is the September 11, 2001 attacks. This term refers to the unexpected nature and unpredictability of the sudden observance of black swans that coincided with the discovery of Australia. Previously, the commonly held belief was that all swans were white in color.[1]


Suggested Revision:
An event often referred to as a "black swan" is the September 11, 2001 attacks.[2]
The term black swan comes from the ancient Western conception that all swans were white in color. In that context, a black swan was a metaphor for something that could not exist. The 17th Century discovery of black swans in Australia metamorphosed the term to connote that the perceived impossibility actually came to pass.

Caen 02:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


Seems better. I would add other events that were totally unexpected, but has tredemnous consequences. The personal computer and the Internet, were unexpected (especially their effect was). The same for the starting of Chrstianity YechezkelZilber 10:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I went ahead and made the change. The reason 9/11 is mentioned is that it is specifically referenced. As for the PC, Internet, Christianity, etc., there would need to be a specific citation in which these things are mentioned, or perhaps a separate section such as "Examples of black swan events". Caen 16:42, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other views

At the risk of enduring flames, I've re-started the criticism section with re-worked verbiage from a prior edit that was thrown out as not-notable. From where I sit, Taleb's work is right at the core of ongoing arguments (see quasi-empiricism in mathematics), yet it brings a newer, and interesting, viewpoint to the debate. That the earlier entry referenced Amazon is not grounds for dismissal. The exodus of some learned social scientists from the academic environment so that they can apply their theories in the modern milieu founded upon the 'web' (Amazon, Google, etc.), with its ever-growing support for experiments across time and space, is one example that Taleb's work is of importance to the discussion. Besides, the Ludic fallacy is real. Let's apply it to proof and model theoretic issues, too. jmswtlk 00:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed the earlier section for failing WP:CITE (re:Amazon reviews) and WP:OR. Although it fails both of these criteria, I've left your version in (tagged appropriately) because your point that the subject is a topic of much current debate and the section has much potential. Skomorokh incite 00:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

The Criticism section is crap. It's one sentence, which doesn't actually offer any criticism, and it has a disclaimer. —Ashley Y 05:22, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. —Ashley Y 08:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did anyone here read the book?

I apologize if any of this sounds insulting, but this page does a poor job of describing what NNT outlined. It makes me question whether anyone working on this page actually read the book.

  1. Black Swans aren't hard to predict, they can not be predicted. Grey Swans are hard to predict (September 11). That's said in one of the other sections, directly contradicting the initial paragraph.
  2. The High Impact of the unexpected section should be completely rewritten. And corrected. Review the Ludic Fallacy page. Better yet, reread the book.
  3. NNT describes theories as "like medicine: often useless, sometimes necessary, always self-serving, and on occasion lethal". Therefore creating a page called Black Swan Theory, seems to be an invitation for scorn from the man himself.--Herda050 09:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)