After keeping this book on my reading list for way too long, I have finally come around to read it.
Overall, it is an objection of the Gaussian normal distribution as the SOLE natural probability distribution. The fractal by Mandelbrot is one suggested alternative. Nothing to see here people, move along. (Or I might have misread the book. There are plenty of interesting statements in there, but I think this one is the main message)
It is also a philosophy book with popular tendencies which also became quite popular. A bit odd in that sense I guess. Nassim draws on a lot of philosophies and philosophers to make his point which is a good thing if you believe in method of building your own work on other people’s literature (which makes you prone to group thing, but you have to start somewhere).
I could hardly detect any “hate” or “shouting voice” while reading the book. His arguments seemed overall valid to me, but I can see how quite a number of people might be offended by his painful but true statements. I personally thought it to be rather entertaining, having a good laugh every 20 pages or so.
It is about 300 pages and reads relatively well if you are interested in philosophy and the venture of trying to understand uncertainty.
If I was to use his argument in my adventure of explaining the world, I definitely would have to read the book at least one more time. With such a peculiar matter as uncertainty and the stringing together of quite a number of arguments it is easy to make mistakes and misinterpret the matter.
10/10, would read again.
Overall, it is an objection of the Gaussian normal distribution as the SOLE natural probability distribution. The fractal by Mandelbrot is one suggested alternative. Nothing to see here people, move along. (Or I might have misread the book. There are plenty of interesting statements in there, but I think this one is the main message)
It is also a philosophy book with popular tendencies which also became quite popular. A bit odd in that sense I guess. Nassim draws on a lot of philosophies and philosophers to make his point which is a good thing if you believe in method of building your own work on other people’s literature (which makes you prone to group thing, but you have to start somewhere).
I could hardly detect any “hate” or “shouting voice” while reading the book. His arguments seemed overall valid to me, but I can see how quite a number of people might be offended by his painful but true statements. I personally thought it to be rather entertaining, having a good laugh every 20 pages or so.
It is about 300 pages and reads relatively well if you are interested in philosophy and the venture of trying to understand uncertainty.
If I was to use his argument in my adventure of explaining the world, I definitely would have to read the book at least one more time. With such a peculiar matter as uncertainty and the stringing together of quite a number of arguments it is easy to make mistakes and misinterpret the matter.
10/10, would read again.
RSS Feed
