An Eye for an Eye
Does having 'Skin In The Game' impact our personal fulfillment?
It's a bit ironic that more than 2 years after my last post, the book that triggered me to start writing again was gifted to me by the very person who urged me to start writing on Substack in the first place - thank you Grant!
I've picked up 'Skin In The Game' by Nassim Nicholas Taleb a few times now and while parts of it had resonated, Taleb's style was unique and I found it hard to follow at times. I am now hooked on the content and have begun drawing parallels to my own life and surroundings. I will highlight a few early learnings and share some thoughts that may resonate or lead you to reach out and debate. Regardless, I am now holding myself accountable to finish the book and come back to you with expanded views and insights :).
Having skin in the game is being accountable for the implications of your actions; positive or negative. Don’t tell me where to invest my money - show me your investment portfolio.
We live in a world where leaders, policy makers, and others in positions of power are making decisions affecting the masses with little to no personal implications of a poor decision. Risk in their decisions is transferred to the public, often those 'below' them in society. At scale, not having skin in the game and transferring risk causes systems to implode. Think of the 2008 financial crisis. Governments bailed out banks, bank executives didn't face penalties or have big bonuses clawed back, but the general public suffered greatly.
Think about the occupations that do not have skin in the game, such as politicians, academics, and media critics. Those without skin in the game are more likely to make decisions that benefit themselves rather than society as a whole, as their decisions don't have direct impacts on their own wellbeing. Now, think about occupations that have skin in the game such as doctors (facing recourse for malpractice), pilots (equally impacted by fatal crashes as their passengers), and engineers (those designing bridges, buildings, etc.). Those with skin in the game will make decisions that benefit society first and are personally compensated to do so.
Law exists to correct imbalances or asymmetries between actions and outcomes. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Not to take this literally, but sharing the losses or gains of an action would be enough to discourage actions that are not in the best interest of society. As mechanical engineer (by training) I think about the laws of physics which require thinking in dynamics, not statics. Forces may not be applied without an equal and opposite reactive force. There are no asymmetries in the laws of physics.
I am ~ 10% through this book and beginning to ponder the impact of having skin in the game on having a sense of purpose or fulfillment. If you are not acting ethically or not acting in the best interest of society, can you truly be fulfilled or find purpose in your life? I think that with skin in the game our successes will be sweeter and our failures will be valuable lessons that we take with us and share with others.
I look forward to continuing to share my thoughts with you and appreciate your feedback. Thank you for reading!
P.S. here’s a few ideas I’ve picked up and pondered:
Tinkering or trial-and-error teaches us more than academia and theory. We have gotten better at explaining than we are at doing.
Evolution can only happen in the presence of existential risk. There's no need to evolve if there's no risk of extinction.
Ingenuity is removing complexity. We can learn more from subtracting than adding. We have more certainty in what is wrong than what is right. Addition creates unforeseen outcomes. Want to identify food sensitivities? Remove foods from your diet and monitor outcomes. Stressed? Do less, not more. Do yoga or meditate, quiet your mind.