Doubling down on narrative rationality. I buy into the most compelling story I can find at any given time and navigate by it, whether it is apocalyptic, utopian, or in between. Narratives get you acting, instead of sitting around investing in or predicting others’ actions.
-
-
A person who has hedged their bets across two stories is half dead in both. Optionalty is overrrated. You live with continuous partial deadness. Antifragility is overrated. You may live twice as long, but you’ll be half as alive.
Show this thread -
But a powerful story can transcend optionality. It can forge multiple weaker stories into one, making you fully alive in one story rather than half alive in two.
Show this thread -
Yes this means accepting volatility in subjectiveity. Instead of boring equanimity you’ll be gloomy in gloomy stories, exuberant in exuberant ones, and fully alive in both. Equanimity is overrated. Up to a point it improves decisions. Beyond that, it’s just fear of intensity.
Show this thread -
-
I’m fundamentally not an investor type. I can do investor type thinking ok at an intellectual level, but I cannot make myself viscerally want to do it, let alone enjoy it. It’s like turning life into a never-ending tax filing project to maximize your refund check.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What is action in the Arendt sense?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
"Lindy"? Most of Bayesian decision theory comes from calculating what the best *action* is for *actors* to take. And usually that's not based on committing yourself to a single story—that's the error Oscar Pistorius made.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.