Is black swan man the most interesting thinker of today?

Most philosophers do (or did) base their ramblings on pop-science and naturalist observations.

literally who/what

>>1464850
Examples?

Philosophers I know either ignore science or have a very limited knowledge on it.

Taleb might be wrong on certain "tings", he does seem to be more knowledgable than others.

>>1464853
Black swan man is a writer of ideas. I think he has interesting ideas. He puts stuff together, from say, Yaneer Bar Yam and Daniel Kahneman.

>>1464845
>>1464875

His name is Nicholas Taleb you fucking fag

Reading him makes me uncomfortable, so I stopped.

>>1464861
>Philosophers I know either ignore science or have a very limited knowledge on it.

What philosophers do you know that *ignore* science?

>>1464924
In what way? Is it because he personally attacked your profession?

>>1464928
Be aware I haven't picked with good taste.

Someone like Daniel Dennet does not ignore science (just a part of it). But Slavoj Zizek and his archenemy Peter Sloterdijk do for the most part. John Gray ignores science, he bases most of his ideas on history and literature.

Include to this the philosophers of my country.

But okay, maybe I do not have enough knowledge of philosophers. But I am in the process of reading more.

>>1464928
I also base this on my experience with lurking and even interacting with r/philosophy. And when some philosophers do incorperate from others fields, I see them making errors.