Nassim Taleb is likely wrong about IQ and talent
- 30
- 11
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Registering a bit of funny before finishing the article "Got rich writing mediocre books"; said the author of a blog that after much striving has reached sub-par.
I assume that dishing out requires taking, re. sneering.
Taleb himself is wholly incapable of taking it, though: he's got the thinnest skin on Twitter and embarrassingly rationalizes his preemptive ego defense as "alpha moves".
More options
Context Copy link
You don't have to be Shakespeare to have a valid opinion on whether a piece of writing is good or not, any more than you have to be Gordon Ramsay to have an opinion on food, or be Roger Ebert to say a movie is bad.
More options
Context Copy link
This is someone who calls everyone who he disagrees with an idiot or imbecile, even after blocking the person. So it's sneering but only in reciprocation of his own sneering. The books were alright, hence mediocre. Mediocre does not mean bad. The concept of second-order effects of harm long predates those books, yet he's trying to act like he invented the idea.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link