I want proof that the "Entitlement Generation" actually exists. I see it talked about everywhere, yet never experience it. Why, exactly, is my generation different from an older generation that thinks it's entitled to social security that a shrinking workforce could never possibly sustain? If we have entitlement problems, our <i>entire society</i> has entitlement problems, not just a bunch of sheltered kids.
Wow, I just found something <i>really</i> insightful. It was in the <i>link</i> that the parent article offered.<p>On Quora, the <i>second</i> highest response is excellent. It's from Michael O Church, and here's the heart of it:<p>"Resiliency comes from an ability to realistically analyze setbacks, which often have complex causes. People who aren't resilient have a variety of unhealthy tendencies, listed from the most unhealthy to the least:<p>* Internalize the rejection. ("It happened because I'm a loser.") This leads to depression and implosion.<p>* Exaggerate the damage or long-lasting nature (perceived autocorrelation) of the rejection. ("Now that I got fired, I'll never get another job.") This leads to bitterness and "cold" anger, which is more dangerous than the "hot" kind because it's long-lasting and tends toward generalization.<p>* Get angry about it. ("It happened because he is an asshole.") This leads to "hot" anger and, often, stupid behaviors (revenge).<p>* Prematurely generalize about the environment. ("It happened because <industry X> is full of sharks.") This doesn't usually impair general psychological health, but it creates an inaccurate model of the world and leads to sub-optimal choices and lost opportunities in the future."<p>I'm going to have to find some way to get this in front of my face every day for a few months until I internalize it. I have found myself making each of those mistakes at times, and when presented in this manner, it is crystal clear that they are nothing more than reasoning errors.
There seems to be a trend to invent new words for an old concept when writing articles. I don't know if the intention is to attract eye balls or to claim that "hey I invent this concept". But most of the times, what you discover is not new. Why invent "The concept of antifragility" when there is a word called "resilience" . Since English is not my first language, please correct me if I am wrong.
"<i>The prototypical entrepreneur is highly risk-seeking to the point of irrationality. A simple cost-benefit analysis would dissuade most people from traveling down this path; yet, the entrepreneur is an entrepreneur because of the risk involved.</i>"<p>If that is his understanding of Taleb's book, then he has misread it completely.<p>Taleb says the best approach is a dumbell strategy, combining conservative choices with convex options whose downside risk is fixed or finite but whose upside is unlimited.
Taleb's Antifragile book has a number of direct entrepreneurial references and many other ideas that are relevant but of more general interest (economics, technology, health related, etc). For example, he talks about the concept of options (based upon the financial vehicle) applying in other areas of life. In general if you have something with a small downside potential and large upside potential, it is an option that is antifragile. Learning new technical skills seems to me to fit into this area. By sacrificing a bit of time and a few bucks on training / books / videos you can develop a product that will delight users, address a need in the workplace, or otherwise create value. Limited downside and great potential upside.
Antifragility sounds exciting, but there's really nothing there. In the context of economics, it simply means relying on competition instead of central planning (by government or by TBTF banks). Outside of economics Taleb has no real examples of antifargility. Engineering is always about robustness, you have 0 examples of engineering systems that are "antifragile".
If that's what helps you deal with failure then go for it. I agree with most of the points mentioned in the article but I don't see how that leads to 'antifragility' as the solution. A healthy dose of realism (perhaps cynicism..) works fine for me.
This reminds me of pg's Relentlessly Resourceful essay.<p><a href="http://paulgraham.com/relres.html" rel="nofollow">http://paulgraham.com/relres.html</a>
I really hate this "entitled Millennial" schtick. It's complete fucking bullshit. Are there some overprivileged, sheltered assclowns in my generation? Sure, as with every other. The idea that this applies to the whole set is insulting and ridiculous.<p>Most of us just want a fair shake. We don't want to be given the prize for doing nothing, because that makes it vacuous, but we want a fair opportunity to compete-- not some bullshit meritocracy that has already been set up to make the well-connected rich kids come out the winners. When it comes to excellence, we know that <i>we</i> will have to do the legwork. We just want the entrenched, incompetent morons who are currently in power to get out of the fucking way so we can do something great. We're not asking for a meaningless victory. We're asking to be liberated from the meaningless defeat that most people get.
Rejection Therapy [1] is what I would think a perfect example of antifragility in the wild. [2] People learn to manage their anxiety in stressful social situations and become more resilient to rejection after playing for awhile. Entrepreneurs like Jia Jiang even leverage rejections to launch and grow their startups. [3]<p>[1] <a href="http://rejectiontherapy.com" rel="nofollow">http://rejectiontherapy.com</a><p>[2] <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/can-we-really-immunize-ourselves-against-rejection/article5817930/" rel="nofollow">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/healt...</a><p>[3] <a href="http://www.entresting.com/blog/100-days-of-rejection-therapy/" rel="nofollow">http://www.entresting.com/blog/100-days-of-rejection-therapy...</a>