Taking a Risk With Nate Silver
A couple of years after I graduated from college, concerned that my ability to understand philosophy was stagnating, I spent part of a year reading A Thousand Plateaus, the inscrutable magnum opus of French continental philosophers Félix Guattari and Gilles Deleuze. The book is hard to describe: Its chapters seem to have very little to do with each other, in turn invoking strange ideas about "rhizomes" and "war machines" and "blank faces." (The chapter I remember best spends a lot of time trying to explain the philosophical significance of the shape of lobsters.)
Why the authors did this is something of a mystery. The most parsimonious answer is that European philosophers are just weird. But a more charitable explanation is that the book is an attempt to describe two different ways of thinking about the structure of the world. Deleuze and Guattari think that almost everyone thinks most everything is structured one way, but they want everyone to at least be able to think and structure the other way. Their weirdness is an effort—however unsuccessful—at trying to change the way their readers perceive the world.
Readers who are scared off by French philosophy should not take this opening digression as a warning against On the Edge, the odd and interesting new book from rogue election forecaster Nate Silver. There are no rhizomes or lobsters to be found here. At the same time, reading On the Edge left me with the same experience of reading A Thousand Plateaus—it felt like the author was, through a series of somewhat disjointed stories and discussions, attempting to change how his readers see the world.
The post Taking a Risk With Nate Silver appeared first on .