It didn’t just teach me systems theory it permanently changed how I interpret cause and effect. I stopped seeing problems as isolated events and started seeing feedback loops, delays, leverage points, and unintended consequences everywhere: in businesses, politics, personal habits, even relationships. Once you internalize the idea that most outcomes are the result of system structure rather than individual intent, it’s impossible to go back to linear thinking.
A close second would be “Gödel, Escher, Bach” by Douglas Hofstadter. It rewired how I think about self-reference, consciousness, and abstraction. After reading it, I began noticing recursive patterns across math, language, art, and software connections that felt invisible before.
Both books didn’t give me answers; they changed the questions I ask.
Looking for (maybe hidden) stocks in systems also changes how one sees the world.
The book devolves into policy opinions that have been absolutely torn apart, but the parts about inequality and inheritance shattered some long standing assumptions.
For example, it points out how generational wealth being gone in 3 generations is not for the reasons people extrapolated, the common assumption being that the person that earned it had a lot of discipline, while the subsequent generations experienced complacency and excess, as that was just anecdotes with no data. It replaces them with data that highlights population growth alone influencing this outcome:
In periods of large population growth inheritances were simply diluted to the point of having little efficacy for heirs. In America the free population was 3,100,000 in 1790, while 308,000,000 in 2010. The last census before the book came out. In comparison, France in the old world had 30,000,000 in 1790 and 60,000,000 in 2010. Old world wealth has tended to stay in the same families for centuries. The US is experiencing the same thing amongst some families and as more families get better at estate structures that work for them, a lower birthrate and age of the country, but all of it challenges the common assumption and point of generational wealth.
There are more illuminations around the movement of capital in that book.
Seeing like a State (1998)
Adaptation and Natural Selection (1957)
The Absent Superpower (2016) (dated now but prescient at the time and noticeably better than the other books by the same author)
dpforesi•2h ago
brihati•2h ago