> people don’t really believe in anything in our society anymore
Should I believe that?
(And is this another way of say "This time is different"?)
Is it actually possible for people not to believe anything, in our society or any society?
> In other words, if the majority of people believe there is a bubble, there is not, by definition, a bubble.
Does this go beyond first-order consequences? Is it also true that the more people utilize the rationale to convince themselves that talk of/paranoia regarding a bubble is a sign of no bubble, the more likely there can be a bubble?
Also, there seems to be the assumption that when people realize there's a bubble, they'll immediately engage in attenuating behavior. I think there's evidence to the contrary -- that as long as people can see a way to continue to profit from it (say, a critical mass of people believing everyone else is the greater fool), a bubble can continue while being widely acknowledged.
"Is it actually possible for people not to believe anything, in our society or any society?"
"We are nihilists, Lebowski! We believe in nothing!"
Sorry, couldn't resist. :)
With all due respect to Peter Thiel, who is much smarter and more successful than I am, I'm really baffled by the statement that "people in our society don't really believe in anything anymore." And I am especially baffled by the implication that this putative, ubiquitous nihilo-cynicism -- even if we accept it to be true, which I don't -- necessarily precludes the formation of bubbles. Did people not believe in anything back in the mid-2000s housing bubble? It seems as if they believed in housing, for one thing. The belief was "widespread and intense" enough to cause a serious freakin' problem.
I'm going to give a guy like Peter Thiel the benefit of the doubt and assume that I'm missing a lot for lack of context. But that quote, at least out of its original context and so presented, is really strange.
> "We are nihilists, Lebowski! We believe in nothing!"
:)
> With all due respect to Peter Thiel, who is much smarter and more successful than I am
Remember, these two things sometimes go together.
Another guy who's more successful than many of us said “Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't lose.”
> I'm going to give a guy like Peter Thiel the benefit of the doubt and assume that I'm missing a lot for lack of context
I'm a little less generous; my guess is that what Thiel says is very smart indeed in the context of boosting certain business interests and/or political philosophies.
Should I believe that?
(And is this another way of say "This time is different"?)
Is it actually possible for people not to believe anything, in our society or any society?
> In other words, if the majority of people believe there is a bubble, there is not, by definition, a bubble.
Does this go beyond first-order consequences? Is it also true that the more people utilize the rationale to convince themselves that talk of/paranoia regarding a bubble is a sign of no bubble, the more likely there can be a bubble?
Also, there seems to be the assumption that when people realize there's a bubble, they'll immediately engage in attenuating behavior. I think there's evidence to the contrary -- that as long as people can see a way to continue to profit from it (say, a critical mass of people believing everyone else is the greater fool), a bubble can continue while being widely acknowledged.