Quote from Cutten:
9/11 was a black swan. 9/11 was likely to take place. The existence of black swans was *certain*, and that was by definition a "Black Swan".
A black swan is not something that is unlikely. It is something that is incorrectly *perceived* to be unlikely or impossible by the majority of people.
Also it's not a matter of logic, it's one of semantics. You and zdreg are using a definition of Black Swan that is not the definition used in Taleb's books. So zdreg is not just wrong in his definition, he and you were wrong to call it logic 101 - it's semantics 101.
i said nothing of logic. i agree, it's a matter of definition. i just read FBR and TBS recently and my impression is different than yours.
black swans are rare events, and they are unforeseen. not by every single person (with millions of market participants, there have to be some that could imagine any possible event), but by the masses.
at this point, with CNBC mentioning the possibility of $200 oil several times a day, it can't be considered a black swan because many people do see it as a possibility (even if they don't bank on it going there) and take action accordingly. if you're considering the likelihood of an event and then doing something about it, it's not a black swan to you.
fortunately, this point is a minor one and has nothing to do with the more important question of what one does with his money in this market.
