My point taken further is that True and False (hence what we call "belief") play a poor, secondary role in human decisions; it is the payoff from the True and the False that dominates-and it is almost always asymmetric, with one consequence much bigger than the other, i.e., harboring positive and negative asymmetries (fragile or antifragile). Let me explain.

If you have more than one reason to do something (choose a doctor or veterinarian, hire a gardener or an employee, marry a person, go on a trip), just don’t do it. It does not mean that one reason is better than two, just that by invoking more than one reason you are trying to convince yourself to do something. Obvious decisions (robust to error) require no more than a single reason.

The fragile wants tranquility, the antifragile grows from disorder, and the robust doesn't care too much.

Realism is punishing. Probabilistic skepticism is worse.

They think that intelligence is about noticing things are relevant (detecting patterns); in a complex world, intelligence consists in ignoring things that are irrelevant (avoiding false patterns)

To succeed in life requires a total inability to do anything that makes you uncomfortable when you look at yourself in the mirror.

They will envy you for your success, your wealth, for your intelligence, for your looks, for your status - but rarely for your wisdom.