Yep, the hidden path. Reminds me of this quote from the Balavagga: "The fool who knows that he is a fool is for that very reason a wise man; the fool who thinks that he is wise is called a fool indeed." Which leads to another great quote (can't remember the source unfortunately): "To be humble it is not necessary to shrink or stoop, but rather stretch to your full height against the backdrop of a much larger reality." We are all fools to some degree, and the greatest master has plenty to be humble about. Any discipline worth its salt contains enough hidden riches to last a lifetime. p.s. maybe paralysis is better understood as a choice in and of itself -- a choice rooted in ego at that.
I am going to buy that book. On top of one of my tv's i have a Hare and a tortoise..... it is to remind me of the results of the race....
Some statements raise some obvious flags: So if a new born child is put through the exact same regiment as a Michael Jordan, Warren Buffett, or Yo-Yo Ma then they too will possess the same extrodinary skills? I doubt it. This is a contradiction. If something is autonomous it cannot be altered by an outside force. This is all fine and dandy, but when will I know that I'm using self-coercion? Is knowing really possible because I'd really like to know so I can catch myself and decide (at will) that from this point on I'm going to use a loving force instead of a devitalizing one. Ain't gonna happen...
RandomEvents, I can tell you don't believe in NLP, that's fine, but I am living proof it works. I used to work in telecom sales, when the going was good ,but you still had to have skill. I modeled the best in the sales dept and guess what, I made president's club twice. No, believe it or not, I am not trying to toot my own horn, I am just trying to explain that if you model success you can have similar results, not the same, but similar. Right now I am modeling a pro trader of 22 years and getting some mentoring and my trading is improving 1000% in the last couple of months. Why do think prop firms exist? That post by Darkhorse is one of the best I have ever seen on this forum, the Confucius of Elite Trader, lol, seriously though a great post Darkhorse!
While I do not disagree with this statement, there must be something deeper going on. If all there was to do was to form relations, a database or a neural network would rule the world by now. "One of the more inspiring messages from this book is what de Quincey calls "the Four Gifts of Knowing." He takes us on a journey to explore the Scientist's Gift of the senses, which reveal the forms of physical reality; and then to the Philosopher's Gift of reason, which we use to analyze data gained through our senses. But these ways of knowing are not enough if we wish to explore the domain of consciousness. Next, he introduces us to the Shaman's Gift of feeling and altered states, which works by engaging and participating with the world around us. Finally, he takes us into the paradoxical realms of the Mystic's Gift of sacred silence, where we transcend and integrate all the other ways of knowing through direct experience. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/15...103-7692625-6455044?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 It is very difficult for me to recommend books like this because I am primarily a scientist and approach the world philosophically. But I can tell you that every success in achieving expertise I have ever had has been through the synthethis of the approach (explanations) given in this book. I only came to this realization recently... There is something about people that trancends a mechanistic ontology. Eventually one may "explain" the "Shaman's Gift of feeling and altered states" and the "Mystic's Gift of sacred silence" through science and philosophy, but that science may look more like mysticism than science as we know it today. Even scientists are complaining about our endless reductionist approach to knowledge and that we need to look at emergent properties: "...He proposes turning our attention instead to emerging properties of large agglomerations of matter. For instance, chaos theory has been all the rage of late with its speculations about the "butterfly effect," but understanding how individual streams of air combine to form a tornado is almost impossible. It's easier and more efficient, says Laughlin, to study the tornado...." and "...In many cases, the whole exhibits properties that can't be explained by the behavior of its parts. As Laughlin points out, we use computers and internal combustion engines every day, but scientists don't totally understand why all of their parts work the way they do." http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/046503828X/ref=pd_bxgy_img_b/103-7692625-6455044?_encoding=UTF8 Perhaps the books that started it all: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/01...103-7692625-6455044?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 and closer to the spirit of the article you posted http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/04...2625-6455044?_encoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155 Godel is always in the middle of it all... Oh so true. nitro