Talk:Unknown unknown
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did Rumsfeld coin this phrase, or was there a precedent?
Have any philosophers said what he said more precisely?
- I believe it was a concept identified a long time before Rumsfeld used it; it's part of a basic 2x2 decision matrix. Saga City 12:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Do you know a reference?
I saw this in a recent journal article (European Journal of Information Systems (2006) 15, 453–456. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000636):
R.D. Laing put to words a useful set of distinctions, which I paraphrase and extend here:
* We know what we know (good, because we are aware and confident). * We don't know that we know (bad, because we lack awareness and confidence). * We know what we don't know (good, because we are humble and motivated). * We don't know what we don't know (bad, because we are ignorant and vulnerable).
Sounds a lot like Rumsfield's quote. Here's the cite. I haven't looked up the book: Laing RD (1970) Knots. Random House, New York, p 55.
http://www.amazon.com/Knots-R-D-Laing/dp/0394717767/ref=si3_rdr_bb_product/103-0227364-4067073
[edit] Removed Black Swan References
I have some problems with putting NNT's Black Swan references on this page:
- An unknown unknown isn't a black swan event. Black Swan events are specifically high-impact, in fact you say that yourself in the next section. An unknown unknown is anything not known.
- Second Black Swans aren't hard to predict, they can not be predicted. Grey Swans are hard to predict (September 11).
- Third, The High Impact of the unexpected section should be on the Black Swan book page (And corrected. Reread the Ludic Fallacy chapter, or the wikipedia entry).
- Fourth, it's fine if decision analysis wants to quote Donald Rumsfeld for the names of their procedures to make decisions (a highly ironic idea in the first place considering the man's decision making track record), but that hardly means that the theory that NNT laid out in The Black Swan should be attached to the man's drivel.
- Fifth, 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, or linking black swan theory to this page, seems to be an invitation for scorn from the man himself.--Herda050 09:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I removed The Black Swan (book) and Black swan theory references because the topics are not the same. Besides the critiques above, I'm not even sure Black swan theory should be a page. Not that I think this page makes much sense either, as it is defining a phrase that was invented or stolen by Rumsfeld (or his PR hack) merely to get out of answering questions, but I'll leave that fight to someone else. The Black Swan (book) however is about randomness and not Unknown unknown. The book is about all uncertainty not an instance of uncertainty, which I gather is what this page is poorly attempting to refer to. Specifically the book is an essay by a man who is attempting, in the vein of the empirical skeptics, to claim that the world we live in is dominated by randomness and that we underestimate this randomness in our daily lives.--Herda050 07:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- So that is what the book is about, but what is the concept of black swan theory about if not uncertainty? The page doesn't make it clear. Should the page just be merged into the article on the book? - Grumpyyoungman01 04:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Grumpyyoungman01 I'm working on the book page at the moment. I will then turn to the Black Swan Theory and refactor that as well. The theory page should describe Taleb's arguments and any criticisims.Herda050 02:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Dubious
I looked for mentions of the King of Norway disrupting an election campaign in Oxford newspapers. While he did visit in 2006 [1], I can find no mention of electoral campaigns. Reliable sources needed. Grouse (talk) 14:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still no source, so I've removed it. 86.147.20.238 (talk) 11:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Move Donald Rumsfeld section to popular culture
It is a nice quote, but it does not merit having an entire section to itself.
Include more about decision sciences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cook503 (talk • contribs) 23:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)