# Antifragile by Nassim Nicholas Taleb  Author:: Shortform ## Highlights > People often think that the opposite of fragility is durability. If something is fragile, that means it’s easily broken. Therefore, if something isn’t easily broken, logically that should mean it’s the opposite of fragile. However, there’s another step beyond durability: something that actually gets stronger under stress. Since there isn’t an established English word for such a thing, let’s call it antifragility—not just the lack of fragility, but its true opposite. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/1a454d8f-4ba8-4433-a177-198b811033a0)) > The solution to this problem is antifragility. Instead of a never-ending search for more accurate models and better predictions, all we need to do is make sure that we’re in a position to benefit from uncertainty and volatility instead of being harmed by it. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/0995fabd-ee0c-498b-b2f1-56c0f0b14ac3)) > We think we can perfectly predict the future and avoid any shocks that would cause our fragile systems to fall apart. We think we can outsmart millions of years of evolution and antifragility, and we’re almost invariably wrong. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/5d79ed90-6ee3-49a1-8090-95c2ab3293fe)) > people in a challenging situation will rise to the challenge and become stronger from it. However, people who get too comfortable miss out on the chance to benefit from antifragility, like the pilots who relied too much on their newly automated systems and ended up crashing their planes. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/88680eeb-b6db-407d-b7a2-60eb41c0f438)) > For example, one learns a language best by being immersed in it, by making mistake after mistake before learning how to communicate effectively. However, to avoid that embarrassment and struggle, we teach languages in classrooms using books and rules, and we get much worse results. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/c165ad2a-6024-40e4-a6b3-bd90433c88ab)) > A system that has some natural variation might seem less stable and less reliable than the previous situation, but it’s usually more stable in the long run. A system that’s naturally subject to change and randomness will be able to cope with variations. It may even become better as those variations destroy weak and flawed parts of the system, leaving the best and most stable parts behind. Such a system would be antifragile. > For example, ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/3fc9ccfc-4c76-4ace-8325-43f5d4f9c9fe)) > A system that has some natural variation might seem less stable and less reliable than the previous situation, but it’s usually more stable in the long run. A system that’s naturally subject to change and randomness will be able to cope with variations. It may even become better as those variations destroy weak and flawed parts of the system, leaving the best and most stable parts behind. Such a system would be antifragile. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/2a134723-1863-49cf-bf3f-74a70639340c)) > Modern society also tends to create large, rigidly controlled systems: centralized governments, multinational corporations, and so on. Large systems are more vulnerable to fragility because they have, and need, many more resources. The effects when those systems break are also much more pronounced. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/dd908041-a57f-44ea-89b9-63498fa7a452)) > Along with size, another common cause of fragility is rigid, top-down control. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/5638da9b-b4c1-414b-82f2-7b640c918d89)) > We could avoid many harmful side effects if we simply shift the burden of proof. Rather than having to prove that something is harmful, we should have to prove that it isn’t harmful before starting to use it—guilty until proven innocent, so to speak ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/0fbed9a7-01ad-4296-b6b5-0f8d90501fb4)) > overreact to setbacks. They use more energy and effort than they need to compensate for the problems they experience. The excess energy goes on to become innovation and progress ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/56fe1dec-1b5f-430e-bdb8-56d71b932882)) > One way to make sure you’re in an antifragile situation is to have many options available to you, so you can make the best choice at any given time. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/1e344586-e317-46d2-af45-53d2d1e16be7)) > In the same way, a fragile situation has a limit to how good it can be, but the negative impacts increase infinitely (or near-infinitely). ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/29a7f2d6-c987-45bb-a382-ad7ebc9de7e0)) > However, an antifragile situation is exactly the opposite, with limited risk but potentially infinite (or near-infinite) benefits. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/862cc30e-7ab7-4d54-be45-9905571155a5)) > Finally, fragility and antifragility have an ethical component as well. Modern society makes it possible to give the benefits of a situation to one person or group and the harm of that situation to another—in other words, it makes one person’s situation antifragile by making others’ situations fragile, which is blatantly unfair. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/a0eb9c4b-df07-472f-ace2-e1f7191af80b)) > The problem is imbalanced agency. Some people have the power to make decisions that affect many others, and the others have no choice but to accept the outcomes of those decisions. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/aeb4f140-2ed4-4b51-a2ec-508630fa8412)) > The people who have the power are the ones who have all the options and therefore, all the antifragility. They can shunt the fragility onto those who are less powerful, generally the poor and the marginalized ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/9bd337df-8526-4917-9cbe-319ef475dbe2)) > The best way to correct this imbalance is by making sure that everyone has something to lose—some kind of fragility that they need to defend against ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/d4f05016-9b92-4293-b776-2f2fb911218b)) --- Title: Antifragile by Nassim Nicholas Taleb Author: Shortform Tags: readwise, books date: 2024-01-30 --- # Antifragile by Nassim Nicholas Taleb  Author:: Shortform ## AI-Generated Summary None ## Highlights > People often think that the opposite of fragility is durability. If something is fragile, that means it’s easily broken. Therefore, if something isn’t easily broken, logically that should mean it’s the opposite of fragile. However, there’s another step beyond durability: something that actually gets stronger under stress. Since there isn’t an established English word for such a thing, let’s call it antifragility—not just the lack of fragility, but its true opposite. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/1a454d8f-4ba8-4433-a177-198b811033a0)) > The solution to this problem is antifragility. Instead of a never-ending search for more accurate models and better predictions, all we need to do is make sure that we’re in a position to benefit from uncertainty and volatility instead of being harmed by it. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/0995fabd-ee0c-498b-b2f1-56c0f0b14ac3)) > We think we can perfectly predict the future and avoid any shocks that would cause our fragile systems to fall apart. We think we can outsmart millions of years of evolution and antifragility, and we’re almost invariably wrong. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/5d79ed90-6ee3-49a1-8090-95c2ab3293fe)) > people in a challenging situation will rise to the challenge and become stronger from it. However, people who get too comfortable miss out on the chance to benefit from antifragility, like the pilots who relied too much on their newly automated systems and ended up crashing their planes. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/88680eeb-b6db-407d-b7a2-60eb41c0f438)) > For example, one learns a language best by being immersed in it, by making mistake after mistake before learning how to communicate effectively. However, to avoid that embarrassment and struggle, we teach languages in classrooms using books and rules, and we get much worse results. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/c165ad2a-6024-40e4-a6b3-bd90433c88ab)) > A system that has some natural variation might seem less stable and less reliable than the previous situation, but it’s usually more stable in the long run. A system that’s naturally subject to change and randomness will be able to cope with variations. It may even become better as those variations destroy weak and flawed parts of the system, leaving the best and most stable parts behind. Such a system would be antifragile. > For example, ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/3fc9ccfc-4c76-4ace-8325-43f5d4f9c9fe)) > A system that has some natural variation might seem less stable and less reliable than the previous situation, but it’s usually more stable in the long run. A system that’s naturally subject to change and randomness will be able to cope with variations. It may even become better as those variations destroy weak and flawed parts of the system, leaving the best and most stable parts behind. Such a system would be antifragile. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/2a134723-1863-49cf-bf3f-74a70639340c)) > Modern society also tends to create large, rigidly controlled systems: centralized governments, multinational corporations, and so on. Large systems are more vulnerable to fragility because they have, and need, many more resources. The effects when those systems break are also much more pronounced. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/dd908041-a57f-44ea-89b9-63498fa7a452)) > Along with size, another common cause of fragility is rigid, top-down control. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/5638da9b-b4c1-414b-82f2-7b640c918d89)) > We could avoid many harmful side effects if we simply shift the burden of proof. Rather than having to prove that something is harmful, we should have to prove that it isn’t harmful before starting to use it—guilty until proven innocent, so to speak ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/0fbed9a7-01ad-4296-b6b5-0f8d90501fb4)) > overreact to setbacks. They use more energy and effort than they need to compensate for the problems they experience. The excess energy goes on to become innovation and progress ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/56fe1dec-1b5f-430e-bdb8-56d71b932882)) > One way to make sure you’re in an antifragile situation is to have many options available to you, so you can make the best choice at any given time. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/1e344586-e317-46d2-af45-53d2d1e16be7)) > In the same way, a fragile situation has a limit to how good it can be, but the negative impacts increase infinitely (or near-infinitely). ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/29a7f2d6-c987-45bb-a382-ad7ebc9de7e0)) > However, an antifragile situation is exactly the opposite, with limited risk but potentially infinite (or near-infinite) benefits. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/862cc30e-7ab7-4d54-be45-9905571155a5)) > Finally, fragility and antifragility have an ethical component as well. Modern society makes it possible to give the benefits of a situation to one person or group and the harm of that situation to another—in other words, it makes one person’s situation antifragile by making others’ situations fragile, which is blatantly unfair. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/a0eb9c4b-df07-472f-ace2-e1f7191af80b)) > The problem is imbalanced agency. Some people have the power to make decisions that affect many others, and the others have no choice but to accept the outcomes of those decisions. ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/aeb4f140-2ed4-4b51-a2ec-508630fa8412)) > The people who have the power are the ones who have all the options and therefore, all the antifragility. They can shunt the fragility onto those who are less powerful, generally the poor and the marginalized ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/9bd337df-8526-4917-9cbe-319ef475dbe2)) > The best way to correct this imbalance is by making sure that everyone has something to lose—some kind of fragility that they need to defend against ([View Highlight](https://www.shortform.com/app/highlights/d4f05016-9b92-4293-b776-2f2fb911218b))