Psychology... the poll

[rols]

Although PKFFW's post indeed contains some minor faults, the point he was making is a valid one. As for gathering the right information (and this not directed towards you rols), there's a whole lot of "opinion gathering" being done on this thread, but not a whole lot of "fact presenting".

Please forgive me, but I fail to see his point. If you look back over his posts on this subject you will find it is an embarrassment of self contradiction and misinformation. Would you like me spell them out?

As this is a thread about Psychology, it does not surprise me in the least that there are many opinions. In fact, part of the usual debate process is in your words, "opinion gathering." As we are not research psychologists on a scientific conference it does not strike me as odd that this thread should take any other course.

Wantonly pasting stuff from the net without reading it (this is not directed at you FW) and presenting this as 'scientific proof' is IMO weak and flimsy and will get from me the respect it deserves.

 

[PKFFW]

Please do not present a diluted edited version of what was actually presented and then use this to boost an already failing hypothesis. Take the time to read some of the previous posts and you will find the substance of this argument is somewhat less monochrome than the black and white version you seem determined to present.

Sorry but your argument is entirely monochrome.

Your only argument seems to be this......many people fail, this proves that some special requirement, that a person is either born with or not, is required to become a profitable trader.

I'm sorry to tell you but no matter how you dress it up this just isn't the case. The fact that many people fail only proves that they failed. It does not prove anything else. The reasons each failed may(and generally are) many and varied. To claim that each failed because they were not born with a special talent is simply not sustainable on the evidence at hand.

Again, I reiterate, I am not talking about those who fail to achieve "genius" status as a trader. I am talking about those that failed to become a profitable trader. Of course some will be more talented than others at trading. Some will become "genius" traders. None of that means that to become profitable one needs to be born with some special talent that only an elite few are born with.

Also, for the record, Edison did not invent the lightbulb.

Therefore 'failing 5000 times' to invent something which had already been invented 50 years previously does not really serve well as an analogy to correct us on our supposed assumptions on what it takes to become a successful trader.

Ok, my analogy was flawed.

Perhaps, here is something that we can agree on? Namely, that the gathering of the right information and using it well are one of the necessities for a successful trader?

QED

Yep, agree with that.

I'm going to assume from your tone that you have never made a mistake in your life? You have never gathered incorrect information or used your information poorly?

Are you suggesting that if someone makes a mistake they can not be a successful trader? Are you suggesting that this is the special talent needed? The ability to never make a mistake?

Or are you simply making a thinly veiled attempt to once again "play the player and not the ball" because it is easier to pick out a mistaken analogy than it is to deal the issue at hand?

Cheers,
PKFFW

 

[PKFFW]

Please forgive me, but I fail to see his point. If you look back over his posts on this subject you will find it is an embarrassment of self contradiction and misinformation. Would you like me spell them out?

Wantonly pasting stuff from the net without reading it (this is not directed at you FW) and presenting this as 'scientific proof' is IMO weak and flimsy and will get from me the respect it deserves.

My memory might be failing me but I don't believe I have posted any stuff from the net in this thread. Copy/paste jobs, links or anything else. Please correct me if I am wrong.

As for misinformation, besides mistakenly beliving Edison invented the lightbulb, which I have owned up to when corrected, please detail anything else that I have posted that you can give verifiable evidence to being incorrect.

As for self contradiction, again my memory may be failing me but I fail to see anywhere I have contradicted myself.

Lastly, as for "presenting it as scientific proof", I have never done any such thing. In fact I have only asked that you of the "born not made" brigade offer up some scientific proof for your viewpoint. I have only ever stated my opinion and questioned yours. You and the rest of your brigade have been the ones to present your views as undeniable facts without actually backing them up in any concrete scientific way.

Cheers,
PKFFW

 

[mp6140]

MP --- aint life grand ?

i must face the fact (especially since we both agree pretty much completely) that PKFFW has bested the best !

therefore, shall we have a vote ---- true genius is born, but diligence and work is what brings it to the fore.

ANYONE can be taught to trade, given no severe emotional or psychological impediments -- how well they do after the learning is then up to them for any number of reasons, including their continuing the game. While stating that anyone can be taught to trade, we are not ruling out those who were born to the purple -- mayhaps trading is as natural as falling off a log (although in the realities of the modern world, rare is the log i have met recently that caused me to "fall off", but city streets are rarely full of them!

ANYONE who continues to trade enjoyably has the right not to have to become george sorros, in fact george sorros is no longer the george sorros we speak of with such awe !
In other words, they can trade for as much or little profit as they so desire, and are not forced into a box where they must become "genius" traders to count as traders at all !

FAILURE at trading is (with a few exceptions pointing towards the successful trader who turns greedy enough to make a fatal error, such as hedge funds getting involved in sub prime mortgages, which they most certainly should have stayed away from ---- but ahh, greed. Had they only stayed within their original purvue, things would have been fine !) is invariably because of lack of education and experience and the desire to "get rich quick" and the hubris of those who try is best illustrated by the desperate need to find the latest and greatest "ROBOT" to do your trading for you ---- THAT is the height of stupidity and laziness, and why they fail because they havent a clue about the workings of the market they just walked into !

is there more to discuss -- probably, but the markets, while slow at the moment, are open and tease me with visions of sugar plums so i must follow the siren call of the pip, and venture forth to do "battle" with all those whose real job is to destroy me !

your embattled, hyper-kinetic, slow moving, risk taking, experienced, moderate level trader

mp

 

[nine]

One again I find myself agreeing with mp6140.

On the call for scientific proof that genetics impacts trading there are actually the results of some good research presented in Martin Seligman's "What you can change and what you can't" which looks at genetic vs learned contributions of various issues people face. The material is presented to be approachable but the references are sound and the factors that are strongly genetic might surprise you.

It is both good science and easy reading (as long as you stay out of the references).

If you look at the types of trading you will almost certainly find that for some types there is a greater than 50% genetic influence on key criteria for success (where fear or speedy decisions are involved). For system trading the influence might be lower (but perhaps intelligence (by some form of measure) would influence ability to develop good systems and their management processes so again X% genetic).

My personal opinion.

There is a high genetic component to trading success. You can however choose a type of trading that suits your genetic makeup (hmmm ... is this part of the reason people say you have to find the right kind of trading for you?) You can also, should you not be truly genetically deficient, improve your performance in any trading arena - but only up to a certain point.

 

[mp6140]

One again I find myself agreeing with mp6140.

On the call for scientific proof that genetics impacts trading there are actually the results of some good research presented in Martin Seligman's "What you can change and what you can't" which looks at genetic vs learned contributions of various issues people face. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If you look at the types of trading you will almost certainly find that for some types there is a greater than 50% genetic influence on key criteria for success (where fear or speedy decisions are involved). For system trading the influence might be lower (but perhaps intelligence (by some form of measure) would influence ability to develop good systems and their management processes so again X% genetic).

My personal opinion.

There is a high genetic component to trading success. You can however choose a type of trading that suits your genetic makeup (hmmm ... is this part of the reason people say you have to find the right kind of trading for you?) You can also, should you not be truly genetically deficient, improve your performance in any trading arena - but only up to a certain point.

==========================================================
LOL -- SO sorry nine --- i am the last to want to force you into that situation !

IMO, genetics, which have long been the grist of "old wives tales" and "urban legend" has a tremendous amount of importance, or there simply would not be the sons and daughters of famous horses running around. Dogs are "bred" based on genetics also, and one only has to look at "1984" to understand how it would probably work with humans ----- people have long known the simplicity of the statement, "its in the genes", which refers to familys and their children and not to a womans derrierre !

To disagree with nine is to disagree with the very basis of life (try DNA studies for a while) ---- its just not possible to disagree !

IMHO

mp

 

[new_trader]

Profitable trading, whether you like to admit it, can only require the ability to mimic someone who is already profitable. Monkey see monkey do is all that is absolutely required to be a profitable trader.

Exactly right...and you are deperately trying to mimic the monkeys because you think they are profitable

Copying doesn't involve, require or lead to understanding...do you see or do you not see? You can copy and paste Einstein’s theories here and it may make you appear intelligent, but can you really explain them in your own words? Would you really understand them? By copying would you have gained an understanding that would allow you to solve other cosmic conundrums like the theory of everything?

Why would you want to copy a profitable trader anyway? Why not just hand them your money and ask them to trade it for you? Cut out the middle man so to speak. Surely you don’t think that copying is the same as learning do you?

 

[Lee Shepherd]

I've been reading through all these very infomative posts and am not sure I quite want to get drawn into this (looks like) personal argument.

I just wanted to share some things that have been floating around my head since reading this thread.

Born V's Made:

Stephen Hawkings - Plagued with many problems and has given him a self purpose to think day and night about his theories - If he wasn't so medically unfortunate would he still have been so great with his studies?

Kim Peek (the real Rain man) - Has mental issues but can count numbers, remember things that he's read picture perfect, can also count cards and tell you everyday on every calendar date - This is obviously some medical genius that has left him physically challenged - Would he still be great with all this if he'd been un-physically challenged and tempted into all of lifes rights and wrongs?

A man with no hands - Cant play the guitar - There must be something out there he can do thats still related to music - maybe even invent a guitar that is played through mind control or with the feet...


What I' m asking is that trading has many different ways in which to play it, therefore, is it possible that if you are or not challenged in some way then as in poker, play the best you can with the hand you have (or feet).

Jimi hendrix was self taught, although just one example and not quite suffient is an inspiration that we are all able to achieve many great things if we try.

Trying is the key, born with genius, full able bodied, mental issues or not.

We are all wonderful and unique and able to accomplish anything we desire, just sometimes we have to change the rules slightly to adapt and use whatever it is we have that the great Lord gave us.




YouTube - The Guitarist

 

[temptrader]

Yes PKFFW and myself do seem to have some things in common. For example, we like to debate reason with reason instead of bringing anecdotal personal references or feelings into play. Also, we tend to back up our opinions and stay on topic rather and respond to arguments rather then play ball on the personal level. But anyway, it looks like we've exhausted your braincells for today, so there's little point in continuining this discussion. Not that there was in the first place.

Oh and talking about braincells, I remember the discussion about the brain being fixed at birth etc. I then posted references to neurogenesis but you (correctly- for a change) said that these studies were still inconclusive. Looks like some progress has been made on the matter: scientists witness neurogenesis. I'm sure your own scientific research will no doubt prove me wrong. Do send me a copy of your esteemed publications while you're at it.

I'm having some fun because I realize what's going on (and knew it from the start to be honest). Hence I might as well amuse myself then.

You and PKFFW diligence and constant pursuit of the points would be admirable in a discussion about a mathematical theorem. Unfortunately, not in an area where things are not what they seem and you just want them to be what you want?

Here are my points on this thread:

1) you (FW, PKFFW etc . . .) want a group hug, affection, positive reinforcement, positive attitude, a problem shared is a problem halved mentality.
2) you want us (me, new_trader etc. . . ) to tell you that anyone can do it if they have enough enthusiasm for the profession (just like those bright eyed naive teenagers on their first job thinking that they can go into any profession they want because all they have "endless" enthusiasm for it)
3) you want us to reassure you that you will make it . . .
4) you then provide proof for your claims, and go on to force it through, as if to force them to be true
5) and then it becomes trues, because, strangely enough, the MAJORITY of you seem to agree it be so

now if that's the way you arrive at the truth (by group agreement) then I want nothing to do with it. All because you think so, or you feel so, doesn't make it so.

That is at the heart of this thread (and subsequently all other threads of this nature): everyone welcome and anyone can do it, just find it all out here and you'll eventually become successful. Lets all start a bloody discussion about an issue regarding trading, work it out as a group, and hence we can all learn it and solve it as a group. It's as if we were running a cooperative of some sort, that it's important that everyone SHOULD make it, because that appears to be what the group WANTS.

I mean what some of you are saying here is utter absurd: it would be like an average looking teenage girl who comes up to a top model asking for advice about how to get it into the industry. (I know this is not a good example on many points, but bare with me). The top model, just by looking at her, will know if she has what it takes or not. The rejected teenager can then go away and talk about "there's no real definition" of beauty, or that "the industry is going through a phase and this and that look is in and I'm out" etc. . . . get with her friends and feel better about herself and arrive at some "conclusions" to make herself feel better . . . To add to this, there's this human tendency to not want to hurt other people's feelings. So she'll go to her friends or her family and ask them whether she could make it or not, and they'll say the polite things: "they just don't know what they're missing", "maybe only blondes are wanted at this time" etc . . .

The human mind is extraordinarily good at self delusion. That's why scams work, that's why hustling works . . .

 

[firewalker99]

I've been reading through all these very infomative posts and am not sure I quite want to get drawn into this (looks like) personal argument.

Born V's Made:
..

Good points made there Lee, and all of your examples are a good illustration of how environment plays indeed a big role in what a person can attain.

 

[firewalker99]

...now if that's the way you arrive at the truth (by group agreement) then I want nothing to do with it. All because you think so, or you feel so, doesn't make it so.

temptrader, having to repeat myself time after time because you aren't prepared to listen to what I have to say becomes rather boring after a while. You'll find that in most of my posts there are little references to what I think or feel, and in fact most of my statements are backed up with references. Something which cannot be said about yours.

Group agreement has nothing to do with it. I couldn't care less whether you or anybody else agrees with me. Again, you keep throwing this totally irrelevant issue into the discussion. It looks to me as if you are trying to avoid tackling the real issues at heart, by going on about the nature of public forum debate, and how well PKFFW and I seem to get along rolleyes. You've been doing more talking about the way this debate has been going on, then really debating the core. If you want to be taken seriously, than you might want to change the way you approach a discussion.

 

[firewalker99]

I mean what some of you are saying here is utter absurd: it would be like an average looking teenage girl who comes up to a top model asking for advice about how to get it into the industry. (I know this is not a good example on many points, but bare with me). The top model, just by looking at her, will know if she has what it takes or not. The rejected teenager can then go away and talk about "there's no real definition" of beauty, or that "the industry is going through a phase and this and that look is in and I'm out" etc. . . . get with her friends and feel better about herself and arrive at some "conclusions" to make herself feel better . . . To add to this, there's this human tendency to not want to hurt other people's feelings. So she'll go to her friends or her family and ask them whether she could make it or not, and they'll say the polite things: "they just don't know what they're missing", "maybe only blondes are wanted at this time" etc . . .

Indeed, it's not a good example. Someone born with one leg will most likely never win the marathon neither. Like I said before, read again my posts and think about what I said about the factor environment. If you still want to argue then, come back with something more than the above pub talk. (Someone sure seems focused on blondes though...)

 

[Lee Shepherd]

Dont bet your money on it Firewalker. If it hasn't been done does not mean it cannot be done.

Indeed, it's not a good example. Someone born with one leg will most likely never win the marathon neither. Like I said before, read again my posts and think about what I said about the factor environment. If you still want to argue then, come back with something more than the above pub talk. (Someone sure seems focused on blondes though...)

As with the average looking girl, she could become a model for hands, feet, body ect.
A new large ladies (over size 16) was released recently for obviously larger ladies. T.V press, mags and some great press.

Who would of thought, that fat women over there was a model. If you talked to one of them in a bar and they told you that, everyone would laugh except the educated.

This obviously seperates nievaty from education. Of which is no crime but no excuse either.

Anyone can accomplish anything they desire, trying is the key, giving up is the failure.
Without hope, life losses it's meaning.

 

[rols]

Indeed, it's not a good example. Someone born with one leg will most likely never win the marathon neither. Like I said before, read again my posts and think about what I said about the factor environment. If you still want to argue then, come back with something more than the above pub talk. (Someone sure seems focused on blondes though...)

Ah but what is the probability of somebody with one leg marrying a Beatle and becoming a millionairess through it?

 

[Crap Buddist]

Ah but what is the probability of somebody with one leg marrying a Beatle and becoming a millionairess through it?

lol. Nice one. i think Sir Paul was wtaching telly when she said she liked driving her MR2 because the gear stick reminded her of a big phallus. n clearly hes got more money than sense... but she did go a bit weird on tv all that squeeling.....

Never mind i'm sure she's hopping over the moon with millions of dollars compo....

But I would anyway.

 

[0007]

Some good points which I've enjoyed reading.

In essence though hasn't it just developed into the usual Nature or Nurture discussion? ...................... the argument's as old as the hills but it's kept many Social Scientists (aka Underwater Basket Weavers) and their ilk in business for years.

Looks good for T2W too!

 

[Crap Buddist]

Saw some old war flick over the weekend, and the big honcho said "give me any man for long enough and I'll make him afraid of me" His point was he had to make his own soldiers more afraid of him so they would beat the **** out of the enemy . Nasty whatsit, bet he was fun at the christmas dinner table...I mean what would you give him for christmas, a few cut off ears ? Suppose he was just doing his job though. He had to condition,manipulate and position their thinking for them.

 

[0007]

Saw some old war flick over the weekend, and the big honcho said "give me any man for long enough and I'll make him afraid of me" His point was he had to make his own soldiers more afraid of him so they would beat the **** out of the enemy . Nasty whatsit, bet he was fun at the christmas dinner table...I mean what would you give him for christmas, a few cut off ears ? Suppose he was just doing his job though. He had to condition,manipulate and position their thinking for them.

Rather reminds me of Wellington when discussing his own troops said something like: "They may not frighten the enemy but by God they frighten me!"

 

[Paul71]

Chartman jacked trading in didn't he? He was supposed to be clued up. JTrader, he's having a break, and apparently he's come up with a few decent systems that make money?

Other 'experts' have come and gone, others will follow suit.

Now before you jump to your defences, the point i'm making is this, the above mentioned people were looked upon as good solid traders,....there's a moral!

Trading is obviously not as easy as the liberals would like you to think it is, the markets don't seem to adhere to political correctness like your local council may. The markets are dog eat dog, no prisoners, no let up. Hobby trading, demo accs, it's rubbish.

Don't listen to me though, i may jack it all in next week, this easy trading lark may not be for me.

 

[new_trader]

Chartman jacked trading in didn't he? He was supposed to be clued up. JTrader, he's having a break, and apparently he's come up with a few decent systems that make money?

Other 'experts' have come and gone, others will follow suit.

Now before you jump to your defences, the point i'm making is this, the above mentioned people were looked upon as good solid traders,....there's a moral!

Trading is obviously not as easy as the liberals would like you to think it is, the markets don't seem to adhere to political correctness like your local council may. The markets are dog eat dog, no prisoners, no let up. Hobby trading, demo accs, it's rubbish.

Don't listen to me though, i may jack it all in next week, this easy trading lark may not be for me.

Agreed. I'm thinking of giving up on trading because what I want now is to win a Pulitzer prize in ummmm...poetry...yes...The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain...this rhyming stuff is a piece of pi$$...so don't tell me I can't get what I want