I liked Taleb's "The Black Swan" but find his Twitter persona grating. He displays an attitude of, "anyone who doesn't agree with me is dumb". I think the opposite is needed now. Complex and difficult issues are better approached with humility, and a frank and open discussion of uncertainty.
There was a particularly childish fight between Taleb and Nate Silver about a year ago on Twitter. I couldn't stand following either of them after that and I haven't looked back.
Wasn't there a similarly childish fight between Taleb and Pinker, too? That kind of thing is embarrassing. I haven't read Taleb but I enjoy the occasional Pinker and don't want to see him engaged in pointless ego fights.
I used to think highly of Pinker, but IMHO in his discussions with Taleb he lost credibility. The discussions were not pointless ego fights, but Taleb exposed some of Pinker's main claims as pseudoscience and Pinker haven't really recovered.
I don't mind arrogance on public personas[^] who are very good at what they do. Think Steve Jobs arrogance. Think José Mourinho "I'm the special one" in 2004. I read it as putting your (reputational) neck on the line. "I'm so sure of this assertion that I'm risking my reputation here.". Taleb is one such brilliant mind.
The downside to arrogance is that it will tank your reputation if you fail. This may be too early in History, and too politically charged to use as an example, but think Trump.
[^] on personal interactions, though, I find arrogance a repellent trait.
A perhaps more important downside to arrogance is that hubris leads to blindness. One can be so blinded by the light of one's own brilliance that one fails to see beyond it. Intellectual humility, therefore, is the recognition of our limitations and helps us remain open to new information.
