All societies are fragile; it is only the individual that is fundamentally anti-fragile.
-
-
Replying to @mistermircea
Families can get stronger through disorder. Social cohesion skyrockets in wartime.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wzeller42
Social cohesion through wartime, as well as family issues involve people on an individual level, not a societal one. Society and social order can only go up to robustness, it cannot gain from disorder, the individua does.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @mistermircea
I don't understand how increased social cohesion in wartime is not a societal gain from disorder. Of course society is made of individuals, and can only change if individuals do. But there are cases where the society abstraction can benefit from disorder. Explain why not?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wzeller42
If we define antifragility as a property of a system it follows that we can predict it to be antifragile given that property, and not given a narrow set of conditions. If antifragility is conditional, dependent on circumstance, we cannot reliably claim the system as antifragile.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mistermircea @wzeller42
The very definition of society is social order, hence to claim that it is an antifragile system that benefits from disorder is contradictory.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The net benefit of social cohesion during wartime does not indicate antifragility, but robustness. If it were a truly antifragile system, we should be seeking war at all times.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.