Is There a Difference Between Harm and Ruin?

4min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

i learn from your paper is really a distinction between harm and ruin. For many probable distribution there theres a completely ling between variation and ruin. If i received the mexican pesso for every time some one mentioned a great moderation to me, that the world is becoming las safer because it's less volatile, sae, i would probably own a er big strip of land in northern mexico. So so in fattale domain, you have to be very careful, because the tale is absorbing. It's a lot word, but that's only money. But when talk about thes vimons, vastly worse as this is not reneable g aheadnow.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of Antifragile, Black Swan, and Fooled by Randomness, talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about a recent co-authored paper on the risks of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the use of the Precautionary Principle. Taleb contrasts harm with ruin and explains how the differences imply different rules of behavior when dealing with the risk of each. Taleb argues that when considering the riskiness of GMOs, the right understanding of statistics is more valuable than expertise in biology or genetics. The central issue that pervades the conversation is how to cope with a small non-negligible risk of catastrophe.