Superstition, Luck and Vodoo

Discussion in 'Trading' started by rs7, Jun 19, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lundy


    I would accept it if someone said Allah is great. As a beleiver in God, i wouldn't mind even repeating it.

    If we want to stay on subject of trading, people shouldn't bring up such deep subjects as our existence and their beleifs about it.

    I'm not for or against such discussions, but they are way off topic.

    I only posted to say that if one type of religious discussion is allowed, we shouldn't mind replies from all sides.
    #41     Jun 20, 2002
  2. rs7


    #42     Jun 20, 2002
  3. lundy


    Science is fact. When it starts getting messed up with theory, like we are all destined to become wormfood and our existence is meaningless, i don't think that constitutes a true or false, but a big maybe.

    I agree, we should stick to known science.

    edit: actually, science isn't necessarily fact, it's simply agreed upon by the general populace. science is really just an evolving consensus on how things work and why.

    for example: it was scientific opinion that the world was flat before C.C. sailed to america.

    and it's scientific opinion that the sun is further than the moon. It's not a fact, cause we don't know it for sure, but it's agreed upon.

    remember, we can't even see the back of our head, or control our digestive processes.
    #43     Jun 20, 2002
  4. stu


    I agree with you but I think maybe issues get mixed up. Whether we become worm food or not in the greater meaning of things is a science maybe, science as it stands cannot prove or disprove there are wormholes (forgive the association) but it can make ecn's work.This is not a discussion about religion it's about superstition, which de facto religion is nearer to than science has been proved to be.
    Superstition in trading whether it's a God thing or the color of your shirt or the problems which rs7 started the thread for are all the same. Separating them for trading and not relying on them is a valid discussio
    #44     Jun 20, 2002
  5. Everyone has an agenda. There is no such thing as truly neutral ground. We would all be better off and better informed if those who claimed to be neutral admitted they are not. For simple proof of this concept just look at three supposedly "neutral" disciplines: science, economics and politics. These are some of the most emotionally heated battlegrounds in society today, because opinions are held by people, facts are interpreted by people, and the foundational framework of beliefs you hold will affect what you think and what you do in every way. Answered or not, internal response to the big questions has a trickle down effect. Whether you have a defined opinion or not, whether you voice your beliefs or not, what you believe deep down (or don't believe deep down) will lend color and substance to everything you say and do.

    Logical positivists are my favorite group of dopes. They say that nonfalsifiable claims are a waste of time. "If it can't be proven or disproven here and now, it's not worth discussing." What a stupid, stupid criteria for what to pay attention to! That's like saying "if I can't figure out that theorem with my $5 radio shack calculator, I'll arbitrarily decide it's not a theorem worth pursuing- in fact I'll declare the question itself invalid." The science worshipers declare anything that cannot be quantified as nonsense, and thus become the ultimate ostrich contingent. "If I can't solve it I can't see it, so it's not there." Do not trust PhD's, do not trust high IQ's, do not trust fancy words. The world is filled with idiots and not all of them are stupid, some are very smart or so it seems.

    Reality is not easy, reality is not cut and dried. You have to really use your mind and listen to your heart as well, you have to put your bogus conceptions and your hopes and wishes aside. I don't believe what I WANT to believe, I believe what I HAVE to believe because the evidence compels me to it. Like the tesla song sez, 'it ain't what it's not, but what it is.'

    Rs7 I didn't mean to hijack your post and turn it into a spiritual thing, I just speak what's on my mind and follow the rabbit trails where they go. Hope I didn't offend.

    p.s. Stu, if you really aren't faster in disguise than I apologize. I just saw some pretty amazing coincidences in timing, subject matter and writing style (that I am still pondering)
    #45     Jun 20, 2002
  6. rs7


    Gee.....thought I knew that one for sure. Guess I have been misled. By the way, see that eclipse 2 weeks ago?

    When the astonauts landed on the moon in 1969, I heard they were initially planning on landing on the sun, because they thought it might be a shorter trip. But they knew they would have to do it at night so they wouldn't burn up, and canceled due to darkness.:confused:
    #46     Jun 20, 2002
  7. stu


    now that's more like it ... those are the posts I know you for logical, articulate, interesting, profound.....but wrong.
    I hope I will be able to read the like for a long time and good luck to you.

    No I am not one of your specters this truely is the only post I have ever made.
    #47     Jun 20, 2002
  8. good point darkhorse about politics, economics, etc. I have a degree in economics and half the stuff i learned is really just somebodies opinion, although the guys who made that stuff up had phds, but then LTCM was run by a bunch of phd's and they still blew up. The thing I learned getting an econ degree that actually matters is statistics. I believe less and less in "certainties" and facts. I'm coming to believe that everything is just a probability, although some probabilities are very high. Physics is proving that out. The atomic theories that led to the atom bomb are all based on probabilities and when they made the first bomb there was a very small chance that it would lead to a chain reaction that would destroy the entire planet. Atoms themselves must be described in terms of probabilities because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle. Everything is chance to a certain extent. The problem is that my brain and most peoples brains are not designed to deal with that very well. That can lead to simply ignoring chance and saying " nah, that will never happen". Think about the probability of an actor with no education, from a poor family, and no success outside of acting becoming the president of the united states ( Ronald Reagan ). Think about purchasing some code from an unkown programmer that is used to operate a hobby toy ( at the time ) and then becoming the richest man in the united states ( Bill Gates ). Think about a failed house painter and ex-con with no education and emotional problems who goes on to rule a military empire and cause the greatest global war in history ( Adolph Hitler, WWII ). Sh*t happens and its hard to understand without getting metaphysical.
    #48     Jun 20, 2002
  9. stu


    thats' really easy to understand ...period

    Science just attempts to show us why it does, won't or maybe will happen.
    #49     Jun 20, 2002
  10. lundy


    there are socieities and cultures around the world which have been civilized for much longer than america or england. Most of the European science was borrowed from places in the mideast, and asia.

    India has the longest history of any "advanced" civilization and their "science" states that the sun is closer than the moon.

    China, which borrowed alot of the science from India, but focused most of it's application on the earth and humans. They understand the human body and the earth more than any other civilization I know of.

    American/European science thinks that people have evolved and we are currently the most advanced civilization i history.

    However, archaeologists (sp?) have uncovered facts about the Aztechs that show they were very civilized. Or what about the pyramids? Also, India, the civilization with the longest known history, had doctors who performed brain surgery thousands and thousands of years ago. ( archaeologists recently discovered this)

    my point is, i'm not a huge fan of modern science, altho it has its uses and applications... it is also full of holes when it comes to describing things which aren't readily tangible like the universe, the earth, and the body. I think this is because instead of going with the flow, we like to break things down into individual elements. The only problem is, it's too complex, thats why for example, modern medicine has failed miserably. (maybe they'll fix it one day)

    I would rather stick with the science from more knowledgeble and advanced cultures such as China and India for less tangible things than say.... a computer.

    also... trading doesn't depend on modern science... it can help, but it can also hinder. Theres no REAL benefit, just convenience at a risk.

    -- Sh*t happens and its hard to understand without getting metaphysical. --

    i agree.
    #50     Jun 20, 2002
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.