The Limits of "Resilience"
![f6ffa8a1527259831c17b28fbe926b1a f6ffa8a1527259831c17b28fbe926b1a](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F549b77c8-632c-4ba6-87a7-f748e847b2fc_216x146.jpeg)
The word "resilience" is much in vogue right now, fir understandable reasons. I think it's tempting, but it misses the point. The dictonary defines resilience as:
"The power or ability to return to the original form, position, etc., after being bent, compressed, or stretched; elasticity"
I'm not sure we want to be resilient - to go back to what we were. I think Nassim Nicholas Taleb has it right in his book "Anti Fragility". He argues that the opposite of fragility is not Reslience or Robust - it is "Anti Fragile"
The idea of anti fragility is that we should seek to grow from the energy of a shock, not just recover from it.
It links to concepts of mindsets and attitudes. Carol Dweck talks about "Growth Mindsets" - the willingness and determination to embrace possibility- and "Fixed Mindsets", the view that things are as they are, and we are as we are, and that's just the way of it.
There's also a useful model in Adam Morgan's book, "A Beautiful Constraint". He talks about us operating i…
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Outside the Walls to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.