This is a second update of the Antifragility mental model that were published long time ago. I will continue to update more models during the next year, but the next update may take a while.
Antifragile: ”A thing that is improved by variations, turmoil, stressors, mistakes, etc.” In this model, I use the word shocks as a common word for the aforementioned.
Fragile, resilient and antifragile
Shocks harm fragile items and persons. Shocks do not affect the resilient. Yet, you cannot invert fragile and get resilient. You get antifragile. It gets better with shocks. Antifragile wants you to abuse it within limits. These limits are high. Antifragile things are common in nature, but rare in man-made inorganic constructs. Genetic code and human bodies are antifragile. Buildings, bridges, and companies are fragile.
Antifragile systems need shocks to function. They finally die without them. These systems work better when you do not change them. Fragile systems get worse without changes. Bottom-up approaches increase antifragility in these systems. Top-up approaches diminish it or destroy them. Even though antifragile systems get better with shocks, they have limitations. Your body can handle hundreds of little rocks separately, but it cannot handle one rock that has the size of hundreds of little ones.
Noticing fragility and antifragility
Limited gains and unlimited harms are characteristics of fragile. The opposite is true for antifragile. For example, flight time is fragile. Your flight´s estimated time of arrival is never hours earlier than it should, but can be days later. Hydra in Greek mythology was antifragile. If you cut one of its heads, it grew two more. Acceleration of harm tells whether something is fragile. For example, when a shock is twice as large than another and it causes more than twice the harm, the victim is fragile.
Large, stable, and purposeful constructions are fragile. The opposite is true for small, but not too small, volatile, and inorganic systems with little parts like the restaurant business. When one part of the fragile breaks, the entire construction breaks. When this happens to the antifragile, it gets stronger. You cannot have antifragility without this characteristic.
Only time will tell you whether something is fragile or antifragile. You might have to wait centuries or millennia to find out. The longer something survives, the higher the odds it is antifragile. Books, genetic code, and even the idea of tablets have survived for millennia. Ideas usually remain, even though their executions can change. Models in this book look antifragile now, but nobody can be sure about the future.
Inorganic structures are more usually fragile and some of them are man-made. Organic structures have more common antifragile characteristics. Humans have existed only a short time compared to life on earth. Genetic code will thrive on earth long after humans face extinction. Nature develops bottom-up and humans usually create top-down approaches. Nature lets complex systems thrive on their own, and humans like to control them. The problem with the latter approach is that humans cannot understand the effects of their actions on complex systems.
Nature adapts to environmental changes, humans try to change the environment. It improves systems through elimination and humans through addition. The former creates better adaptability, the latter higher odds of destruction. Nature adapts to changes without effort, humans do anything to resist them. Nature approves the fact that failures are natural ways to improve the common good. You cannot say the same about humans.
Nothing has 100% efficiency in nature. It has slack and redundancy. They are signs of antifragility. Humans have two kidneys, instead of the one they need. Animals have useless body parts. Efficiency creates fragility. Even though there are no systems with 100% efficiency, the ones that aim for it have almost 100% certainty of destruction. All parts of these systems have to stay intact. Therefore, they are fragile. Systems that allow the destruction of some parts are antifragile like the restaurant business. If one restaurant goes bankrupt, others will stay alive. The system becomes stronger.
Commonalities of being less fragile
You will never be antifragile. It is not possible. Your body and brain will eventually decay. Your genetic code can be antifragile, but it depends on your offspring´s ability to reproduce. You can become more antifragile, but with opportunity costs. Sacrifice efficiency to make it happen. Here is how:
Little short-term shocks are good for you. Increase their amount in your life and minimize the amount of long-term shocks. Deal with the latter first.
Increase slack and redundancy. Faster and more efficient is never better after certain points.
Focus on ideas that have survived the test of time.
Larger downside than upside is the warning signal.
Focus on survival. Never put your survival at stake, unless you have to. This applies to everything.
Never listen to anyone who transfers part of your upside to himself, but not the downside.
Favor the natural over the man-made.
Favor simplicity over complexity. On average, reducing is better than adding.
Build systems that do not have a single-part dependency.
Do not interfere complex systems.
Do not use statistics to approach power-law events.
Favor practical knowledge instead of theoretical. Listen to practitioners, not academics.
Use the rational trial-and-error approach and never repeat the same mistake
Establish ways to learn from other people´s mistakes.
Think about suckers. If you cannot find them, it is you.
Have many reliable sources of income and data.
The amazing part of all is that you have to be less smart in most of these cases. You can also be more often wrong and still get higher odds of positive outcomes in life. These commonalities apply also to organizations. Most of them have negative first order effects, but in this complex world they do not matter much. The real advantages of those approaches apply to second- and higher order effects. Some of the opposites of the list have precisely inverse effects when talking about become more fragile.
