Last update: 2024-01-25
The precautionary principle (PP) states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing severe harm to the public domain (affecting general health or the environment globally), the action should not be taken in the absence of scientific near-certainty about its safety. Under these conditions, the burden of proof about absence of harm falls on those proposing an action, not those opposing it. PP is intended to deal with uncertainty and risk in cases where the absence of evidence and the incompleteness of scientific knowledge carries profound implications and in the presence of risks of “black swans”, unforeseen and unforeseeable events of extreme consequence.
From https://necsi.edu/the-precautionary-principle
Taleb took his fight, precautionary principle in hand, to Monsanto and battled against genetically modified food.
In this case, he insisted that we use the precautionary principle since we don’t have all the evidence, yet, to adequately understand the risk of genetically modified food. The genetic modification of what we eat exposes certain agricultural species (take the humble tomato for example) to potential ruin. A type of risk exposure that Taleb argues, and I agree, is completely unthinkable.
Larger risks on smaller scales are the work of innovation and improvement. Never otherwise.
What might seem like low risk, in this case, gene splicing to increase crop yield, becomes too much at the large scale it is being practised on. Even something that on its surface is low risk likely hasn’t had all variables adequately accounted for, and therefore still exposes a fatter tail than one might think. Risk of ruin.
From https://atlasgeographica.com/the-precautionary-principle-explained/
The precautionary principle (or precautionary approach) is a broad epistemological, philosophical and legal approach to innovations with potential for causing harm when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. It emphasizes caution, pausing and review before leaping into new innovations that may prove disastrous.[1] Critics argue that it is vague, self-cancelling, unscientific and an obstacle to progress.[2]
In an engineering context, the precautionary principle manifests itself as the factor of safety, discussed in detail in the monograph of Elishakoff.[3] It was apparently suggested, in civil engineering, by Belidor[4] in 1729. Interrelation between safety factor and reliability[5][4][6] is extensively studied by engineers and philosophers.
https://tim.blog/2023/09/07/nassim-nicholas-taleb-scott-patterson/
See https://fernandonogueiracosta.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/taleb-nassim-silent-risk.pdf