[ ]this commentary is organized in two sections, respectively dedicated to the forms of thought, and to the forms of organization that may support (re)generative resilience, in the conditions created by the COVID-19 crisis [ ]those signals had been observed in all those cases, and even ‘voiced’, but those voices went unlistened by those in power who could have taken appropriate action [ ]it is possible, and even with method (Byrne, 2005;Simon, 1973): generating hypotheses of action with high chances to solve problems, using pertinent theories (rather than at random or, worse, by systematically biased judgment);holding a wide repertory of possible explanations (hence wide, multidisciplinary general knowledge, as the diffusion of a disease depends also on social and demographic variables);abducting possible laws (e g of contagion) avoiding faulty inductivist inferences;always test hypotheses… – [ ]behaviors oriented to gain power and visibility rather than to solve problems where lives are at stake, or behaviors biased by the use of faulty heuristics, is equally bad no matter whether adopted by scientists or by politicians

中文翻译：

---

黑天鹅与生成弹性

[]此评论分为两部分，分别针对思想形式和在COVID-19危机造成的情况下可能支持（再生）复原力的组织形式[]已经观察到这些信号在所有这些情况下，甚至是“发声”，但那些有权采取适当行动的当权者并没有听从这些声音[]，即使有方法，这也是可能的（Byrne，2005; Simon，1973）：产生行动假设运用相关理论（而不是随机地或更糟地通过有系统的偏见判断）来解决问题的机会很高;拥有大量可能的解释（因此有广泛的，多学科的常识，因为疾病的传播还取决于社会和人口统计变量）；避免可能的归纳法（例如传染病），避免错误的归纳论证；总是检验假设…– []旨在获得权力和可见性的行为，而不是解决危及生命的问题或因使用错误的启发法而产生偏见的行为，同样不管是被科学家还是政客采用，都是不好的