I'm about halfway through Nassim Nicholas Taleb's Antifragile and it's been an engaging read so far. There are tons of concepts in here and I originally wanted to explore a few, but it wasn't working so I think I'll just touch on one: uncertainty.
When we think of traditional fields of study, physics is the one with the most certainty. The term physics envy stems from attempts at introducing certainty into fields that do not lend themselves well to certainty, such as economics, philosophy, or even biology. There are variables, like human irrationality, that create near unpredictable second or third order effects. Rationally knowing something does not mean we always act on this knowledge; many actions are based on emotions, which are ever shifting and unpredictable at the individual level.
Physics envy has extended beyond academic study, into our regular lives. When we try to make smooth out uncertainties, we can stifle benefits of randomness. Take a look at the increase in kids in classrooms who are diagnosed with ADHD and put on medication. It's easier for a teacher to manage 25 kids who behave uniformly and predictably instead of 25 kids who have quirks and curiosities. By smoothing out the randomness in a classroom system, we risk extinguishing some of the brightest potential. Some of the most brilliant minds of the past showed many eccentricities and abnormalities that today would likely lead to a prescription of some pharmaceutical cocktail.
The very way Antifragile is written defies some elements of certainty. Many passages initially appear to be stand alone parts. I read The Black Swan earlier this year and found it tough; the headings didn't progress linearly.
Contemporary books follow a predictable format. There's an introduction of some problem and its relevancy, a historical story of how this problem came to be, further analysis of the problem, and then some suggested solutions. The general arc makes sense, but sometimes when books and their information are overly structured and packaged, they can seem more like a spoon feeding or a marketing persuasion than a chance for readers to think through ideas. I think of Hemingway's iceberg theory, how the omissions - the uncertainties - are what strengthens the story.
It's that reach that makes knowledge codified in our minds. So with The Black Swan, and now Antifragile, I have to think harder, but that was maybe the point.