Antifragility: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
4 bytes removed ,  22 January 2020
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:


==Ethical implications==
==Ethical implications==
Antifragility can be used to justify any kind of moderate adversity, e.g. some kinds of celibacy such as premarital chastity could count as moderate adversity. However, moderate adversity may still be associated with an ''economic'' cost, as well as a cost of safety and societal cohesion in the near-term (see [[adverse effects of inceldom]]), which may cancel out its long-term positive effect. Generally, resilience and steeling suggests an extremely wide range of practices within bounds of moderate adversity have beneficial or neutral effect on the flourishing of a society as long as they do not interfere with the economy, societal cohesion etc.
Antifragility can be used to justify any kind of moderate adversity, e.g. some kinds of celibacy such as premarital chastity could count as moderate adversity. However, moderate adversity may still be associated with an economic cost, as well as a cost of safety and societal cohesion in the near-term (see [[adverse effects of inceldom]]), which may cancel out its long-term positive effect. Generally, resilience and steeling suggests an extremely wide range of practices within bounds of moderate adversity have beneficial or neutral effect on the flourishing of a society as long as they do not interfere with the economy, societal cohesion etc.


== References ==
== References ==
17,538

edits

Navigation menu