The Mindcrime Liberty Show with Dobson and Patton

EP. 47: Part 2 Nassim Taleb's precautionary principle, infinity and Black Swans.

The mindcrime liberty show continues its discussion of Nassim Taleb's black swan theory and precautionary principle. This time it focuses on the precautionary principle especially in regard to the lock-down as well as other extreme events. What exactly is Nassim Taleb's position on extreme risks and how does he differ from other analysts/scientists in particular mathematical ones ranging from mainstream climate scientists to Fauci and Ferguson. Taleb, like Mises and Hoppe, is very critical of most mathematical models and statistical methods. This is a key part of his work and for that matter for better or worse his "fame," however, unlike Hoppe  Taleb has adapted an alarmist position and maintained it and at times uses mathematical models.

 Swithun's critique of Taleb's non naive precautionary principle is on his usage of probability and infinity.  If one plays a game which is ruinous infinite numbers of time one will eventually be ruined.  Defining ruin is itself a continuum problem but even if one does define systemic ruin one still must play the game an infinite number of times which one can't.   Taleb has an arbitrary difference between zero probability and events with functional zero probability. Taleb claims that certain events have been observed to be non ruinous so we can give them a functionally zero probability yet we have never seen a virus cause total global ruin yet we have to assign a non zero probably to it.   The planet and mankind itself will eventually die the question is only when. Plenty of extreme events to paraphrase Thomas Sowell have no solutions just trade-offs.   

Taleb's precautionary principle is useful but his idea of skin in the game and iatragenics which follows standard libertarian analysts of complexity (including Hayek not just Mises) is more useful and sound.  Taleb is only doing cost benefit analysis  which he is disguising as the non naive precautionary principle while throwing out all his previous ideas to be what amounts to a big government alarmist. When one interferes with a complex system one should be careful about its unintended consequences.  The lock-down, as well as most draconian proposals to fix climate change quickly if it exists and is really dangerous may not work anyways as we can see with the heuristic of  Sweden or parts of the US that didn't lock-down as much.  Nonetheless, even if  draconian actions do "work" do they have other costs and do they outweigh the benefits? Its quite clear that Megacorps like Amazon, healthcare apparatuses and the state have increased there power and thereby benefited enormously but has everyone else? Lets look at the most vulnerable themselves like the elderly. Has the nursing home patients in Cuomo's New York which may have one of the highest death-rates in the world (who could have predicted that other then the mindcrime liberty show). Furthermore to discuss other costs many elderly are isolated and can't see there grandchildren or even there spouses.  Most of the "cautious" (or hysterical) actions taken especially after 2 weeks are only brought about by using an aggressive police and managerial state all of whom  have benefited! Hence had skin in the game the wrong way!  They got richer, more prestigious and more powerful thanks to the event. 

Speaking of costs, certainty and aggression Taleb has used aggression from the NAP to claim that libertarians should be extra alarmists and minimize travel and wear masks proudly. Although I didn't here Taleb condemn  the littany of fiery and peaceful   large public gatherings (nor many others) nonetheless it is unknown if going out is actually a superspreader event or not wearing a mask is an  aggressive act.  Having a gathering while not wearing mask by common law standards is a very beneficial thing to do (not just fiery yet peaceful protests) and not having them has huge known costs.  Here is Murray Rothbard on aggression, complexity and uncertainty (which Taleb should know a thing or too about):

If we are unsure, it is far better to let an aggressive act slip through than to impose coercion and therefore to commit aggression ourselves. A fundamental tenet of the Hippocratic oath, “at least, do not harm,” should apply to legal or judicial agencies as well. -Murray Rothbard.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ep 46. Black Swans and the Precautionary Principle part 1

The mindcrime liberty show discusses the work of Nassim Taleb and his Black Swan book/idea and precautionary principle.  Today we will discuss black swan events and are they a rigorous concept. The term black swan comes from the medieval expression that said "you’d sooner see a black swan than some (fill in rare seemingly unpredictable event...say George Bush, Barack Obama and Osama Bin laden share a win in the nobel prize in chemistry)."  Unfortunately European explorers found a black swan in Australia!  Maybe the chemistry prize might not be so rare and unpredictable.  What exactly is and isn’t a predictable event.  What exactly is science?  Is science merely making correct predictions or is it a prior theorizing? How much data does one need in a sample before the 100 year flood  (or financial crash) or thousand year flood shows up in the data sample (clearly more then 50 years of data).  If that event doesn’t show up in ones empirical data does it even exist?  Is that a blind spot of empiricism and statistics? Furthermore, are some things just in principle unpredictable?  Is Nassim Taleb a proto Misean (either richard or ludwig)?    Another key concept which Taleb may not have invented but definitely made mainstream is the idea of fat tails or that one event represents 90 percent (or higher) of the total.  WWII represents (contra Pinker) more deaths than most other wars.  No one cares or should care about the average war or the average height of a river or average height of a flood.  Its useless information.  The outliers are the events that are significant. WWI and WWII are clearly more significant than a series of small conflicts or small recessions.  Katrina is clearly a more significant hurricane than any minor tropical storm.    Nassim Taleb has clearly had “influence” for better or worse and arguably up until recent events Tim would argue for better. Next episode we discuss the precautionary principle and whether anything can be done to mitigate or prevent these high consequence events which may or may not be predictable as well as if one actually can do anything and want to do anything.   

 

Nassim Taleb work to critique Pinker and the idea of the long Peace.

https://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/pinker.pdf

 

Gary North's great criticism of Taleb 

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2007/03/gary-north/einstein-and-keynes/

 

Mises institute on Taleb 

https://mises.org/wire/when-nassim-taleb-channels-ludwig-von-mises 

 

Some Fundamental differences between Taleb and Mises.

https://mises.org/wire/some-fundamental-differences-between-ludwig-von-mises-and-nassim-taleb

 

 

 

 

 

Ep. 45 Taboos with Terminal Philosophy

The mindcrime liberty show discusses 3 taboo topics including scientism, the crusades and the US Israeli relationship with Terminal Philosophy. 

Ep. 44.Was Yuri Bezmenov right? #Call of duty trailer.

Awhile back there was a trailer which included a talk made by ex KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov.  He argues that there is a four step process of propaganda including demoralization, destabilization, crisis and finally normalization. Did the USSR's active measures have the ability to actually influence the west from the outside in the way he describes or is it homegrown?    Was the USSR as bad as he says it was considering that he thinks demoralization is over-fulfilled in the West?    Does Bezmenov have a solution to fix the problem he identified? 

Ep 43. Moldbug vs Chomsky hypothetical debate on #power #democracy #media

The mindcrime liberty show discusses what a hypothetical Noam Chomsky versus Moldbug (aka Curtis Yarvin) debate might look like comparing and contrasting their agreements and disagreements. This conversation is structured in the format done by Alasdair MacIntyre in  his book After Virtue, Dallas Willard in Nietzsche versus Christ at the veritas forum or especially the book the Great Debate Burke and Paine (ie it’s not a real  live debate if one is thinking that).  Both Chomsky and Moldbug somewhat ironically end up with the same view of America and its various Satellites/vassal states around the world: they are undemocratic oligarchies. This is clearly demonstrated in Chomsky's book manufacturing consent which takes aim at the corporate press and if you examine what Moldbug would call the cathedral they both end up with roughly analogous models albeit with quite different visions of what a better society would look like. Moldbug and Chomsky mainly differ on the question of democracy on both its feasibility and desirability. Moldbug of course has a low view of democracy which mirrors David Friedman's competitive dictatorship model as well as Hoppe's monarchy theory while Chomsky is a left anarchist. We also discuss Chomsky’s at times bizarre relationship with both academy and the corporate press considering his stance otherwise.

 

We selected these two thinkers because both Chomksy and Moldbug have similar class and social backgrounds and are two central figures in modern American/Western discourse for better or worse.  Chomsky casts quite the long shadow and is the Bertrand Russel of our time while Moldbug has cast his own influence with a seemingly small platform and for many years operating under his pen name.  Certain aspects of the mainstream right and left would regard both of them as dangerous or even quite frankly stupid.  That may be the case but their influence cannot be discounted and we both think they are very good representees of a certain intellectual debate existing in the current age  over democracy and its feasibility/desirability while at the same time having similar models of the existing society i.e an undemocratic oligarchy managed mainly by the corporate press and to some extent the education system.

Is Kim Jong-il (or the dear leader) right about math?

The mindcrime liberty show discusses the philosophy of mathematics using a statement made by the "dear leader" of North Korea.  In a statement during a school class of whether 1+1=2 the "dear leader" purportedly  stated that it doesn't always equal 2 rather that sometimes it can equal 1. If you take one drop of water plus another drop of water do you get 1 big drop?  The statement made by the dear leader is obvious alarming propaganda representing an Orwellian nightmarish state, nonetheless, we use this as an inroad to discuss various philosophical issues relating to math. 

Do numbers exist? Are numbers merely a useful fiction or do they have some platonic or abstract existence. We  discuss the different numbering systems including the roman system which arguably is more intuitive as Herbert Spencer argues.    We finally end with a  discussion of  the dearth of "philosophy of mathematics" training or interest from professional mathematicians who tend to treat math as something that just exists and isn't to be questioned.  Why is that the case? Does math need to be knocked off its perch a few levels? 

Ep. 41 Power, Democracy and pessimism with James Lawrence.

The mindcrime liberty show discusses power, democracy and pessimism or commonly known as the black pill with James Lawrence. What is power and what kinds of power are there?  We also discuss what ideology that rules the west namely Progressivism or its various synonyms given by Curtis Yarvin (aka Moldbug).   We also discuss the concept of democracy and what exactly is it.  We finally end with a discussion of whether one should "give up" or at least give up on voting due to the fact that "non left wing parties" (conservative or republican) have done hardly anything in both the UK and the USA.   If electoral politics are out what exactly must be done?

Ep. 40 Ed Feser's Roman Catholic theory of the state. #Iraq War #Anarchism #Rothbard

The mindcrime liberty show discusses Ed Feser’s “statism”  with regards to the functioning of the Roman Catholic  Church  as well as war.  Do traditional Roman Catholics have the best theory to defend  the state in both domestic as well as foreign affairs? Would the traditional historical catholic church even recognize the state which Ed Feser is defending, ie the US state (a protestant founded liberal Lockean  republic), not the Holy Roman Empire led by the papacy on the chair of St Peter.  Are the Lockean principles which many ground rights or property on in it themselves baseless?  What are the strengths and weaknesses of Ed Feser's natural law approach to defending the state as well as private property? Ed Feser in various parts of his writings includes a truck load of provisos to attack  property but still admittingly defends private property itself saying its natural if not outright good.  Same thing with the state.  At what point do the provisos and emergencies make private property functionally “public” property controlled by a state which leads to all the problems identified by anarchists, minarchists and the lockean liberals.  Why isn’t Ed Feser a socialist?

When it comes to foreign affairs Ed Feser may do a fairly effective job at saying that Roman Catholic Christianity isn’t compatible with anarchism (or at least Roman Catholics can’t be anarchists …..we will leave the Protestant Christian part out of it for the purposes of this conversation) but nonetheless is Ed Feser crying wolf when it comes to his advocacy of the Iraq War.  Why did Ed Feser lend support to such a ruinous and pointless war even if in theory the Catholic just war theory fought by a legitimate actor is justified by Ed Feser’s natural law Catholicism.  Didn't in the long run the pacifists and "Rothbardian Catholics" who he says more or less are   a contradiction in terms get vindicated by the actual outcome of the war which he defended?  

 

Ed Feser on the Holy Roman Empire.

https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2020/12/what-was-holy-roman-empire.html

Ep. 39 Interview with former teacher/administrator on the California Public school system.

The Mindcrime Liberty show interviews a former public school teacher and administrator on what exactly is the state of education in the very large state of California.  What changed over the years regarding funding and curriculum? Was there ever a golden age of public schools?  What is the politics or viewpoint of  the teachers themselves or the curriculum. Who controls the education system? The local parents or the state bureaucracy?  What is the future of education in particular public schooling? 

Ep. 38: What would punishment look like in an ideal or free society?

 

The mindcrime liberty show discusses punishment theory.  What would punishment look like in an ideal society or a stateless society? What is the purpose of punishment: to repay property damages, deter future crimes, a moral crusade on behalf of god or some secular god/creed or class oppression to protect the ruling class?  Is punishment (or “justice”) merely a sociological construction to maintain one groups dominance?  That definitely explains why Julian Assange is being “punished” (as well as historically Christ, Paul, and Socrates all of which got punished by the ruling powers).  If someone like Julian Assange or Edward Snowden for example was to be freed then the existing ruling powers would be unmasked and there maybe more future leakers or as  Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama refers to as "29 year hold hackers" or as Hillary Clinton refers to as "tools of Russian intelligence."  We both hold that punishment must in a way exist of some kind (even if it's merely extreme social ostracism) otherwise arguably there would be more murders and thefts even if they are only small time murderers and small time thieves not large states.  It's not only right wing libertarians or angry religious theonomists that punish people even in some sort of Chomsky style anarcho syndicalist commune there must be some kind of punishment for those who want to concentrate power or start a state/megacorporation.  Actual existing socialists or communists countries clearly punished people quite ruthlessly. The most ruthless prison system today is probably the North Korean prison system and the most ruthless historical system probably was East Germany with its mixture of high functioning society and tyrannical occupier state.  So punishment must be meted out to those who violate the creed of a society be whatever creed that is. If the creed is property rights then anyone who violates property rights must be punished. If the creed is anarcho syndicalism then anyone who wants to start a capitalist enterprise must be punished.  If the creed is progressive totalitarian humanism then anyone who wants to think otherwise must be punished.   After all feminists clearly think rape ought to be punished and most “right thinking persons” think that certain current and historical boogieman ought to be shot or removed even from photos as Stalin did.  In all of these possible societies and instances what ought to be done?  Is mass incarceration a solution? The trouble with this is it requires a huge amount of societal resources to imprison people long term and is a strictly modern phenomena.  Swithun thinks that corporal punishments and the death penalty are an improvement over the current system. Tim largely agrees even citing Michel Foucault pointing out that the modern totalitarian “humanist” therapeutic state has grown significantly on its various moral crusades to unfathomable levels and arguably is the most inhuman system ever built. The welfare state and the public school system system are arguably just an extension of them to warehouse unruly people who don’t fit into the current society which is not that different then historical societies. Maybe public caning or hanging would be an improvement over mass incarceration.