Remapping the Mind

[Trdr]

An article by Brett N. Steenbarger:

"Remapping the Mind: Cognitive Therapy for Traders"

 

[Directional]

agree with tsuntzu, i took some time to read this earlier this afto, interesting stuff - thanks for posting it

 

[SOCRATES]

Yes, I read it too.

From my point of view it makes for depressing reading, to think that the great majority of traders have these sort of problems, when really it is so easy to be on the other side of the glass.

You only have to look around and all the advice you read is targeted at people with problems.

This is because traders who do not have problems have no cause to air complaints. As a result, the modelling that results is a consequence of using models with difficulties of some sort or another, instead of using models who have no difficulties of any sort.

 

[North_Face]

From my point of view it makes for depressing reading, to think that the great majority of traders have these sort of problems, when really it is so easy to be on the other side of the glass.

If it is so easy to be on the other side of the glass (whatever that means) then please enlighten me of these easy steps to eliminate all of these 'sort of problems'.

You only have to look around and all the advice you read is targeted at people with problems

I do not necessarily disagree with you here. The world is filled with those who want to profit off of the emotions of others and the idea that there will be a quick fix. All that they need to do is touch a nerve with people by discussing something that is a more common 'problem' that people face in their lives.

Having said that, I have been fortunate enough to have been able to see Dr. Bretts work, through his writings on a private list, for a number of years and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he is completely sincere and driven in trying to help people through emotional issues. He has a gift of communicating things so succinctly and anyone who will allow themselves to take his writings to heart through being completely honest with themselves and taking their own personal inventory that they can not help but benefit.

This is because traders who do not have problems have no cause to air complaints.

DeNile is not just a river in Egypt, though I suspect all but about the third Standard Deviation of traders are living there if they think that they are not one of 'those people' with their own unique problems.

As a result, the modelling that results is a consequence of using models with difficulties of some sort or another, instead of using models who have no difficulties of any sort.

That sentence is completely incoherent to me. Could you re-phrase that or give an example to make that sentence make sense?

NF

 

[nine]

This is because traders who do not have problems have no cause to air complaints. As a result, the modelling that results is a consequence of using models with difficulties of some sort or another, instead of using models who have no difficulties of any sort.

Not true in this case Soc. Brett is working with "complete" groups of pro traders who include those with and without issues - no doubt of varying levels of health and unhealth.

 

[SOCRATES]

Not true in this case Soc. Brett is working with "complete" groups of pro traders who include those with and without issues - no doubt of varying levels of health and unhealth.

I do not see the point in having to work with groups of pro traders who do not have any issues.

But I do see the point of him working with traders who do have issues.

The ones who do not have issues keep themselves to themselves and keep quiet as mice and get on with it, because they don't need any help of any sort.

It is only the ones that need help that you hear about.

I assure you I am very well informed on such matters, that is why I am able to make the comments that I do make.

 

[SOCRATES]

If it is so easy to be on the other side of the glass (whatever that means) then please enlighten me of these easy steps to eliminate all of these 'sort of problems'.

A glass wall existsas a manner of speaking. This glass wall you could say is a dividing wall of which most people are totally unaware. It separates those who do not have any problems from those that have problems.

I do not necessarily disagree with you here. The world is filled with those who want to profit off of the emotions of others and the idea that there will be a quick fix. All that they need to do is touch a nerve with people by discussing something that is a more common 'problem' that people face in their lives.

I agree, but this is because the great majority enocounter problems.

Having said that, I have been fortunate enough to have been able to see Dr. Bretts work, through his writings on a private list, for a number of years and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he is completely sincere and driven in trying to help people through emotional issues. He has a gift of communicating things so succinctly and anyone who will allow themselves to take his writings to heart through being completely honest with themselves and taking their own personal inventory that they can not help but benefit.

Do I say or imply that the gentleman in question is insincere ? To the contrary, but the question is he has taken on a mission to try to help people(people who have problems) to do something to help themselves.


DeNile is not just a river in Egypt, though I suspect all but about the third Standard Deviation of traders are living there if they think that they are not one of 'those people' with their own unique problems.

I agree with you but denial is what unsuccessful individuals enact, Successful individuals are so because they are not burdened with unresolved issues.


That sentence is completely incoherent to me. Could you re-phrase that or give an example to make that sentence make sense?

Must I spell it out for you ? Must I ?

NF

.

 

[Danger Field]

Psychological profiling of specific target groups such as this article attempts is futile. Any target group is anomalous by the nature of the wide-ranging aspects of constituents of that target group. Ultimately all psychotherapy and psychology is anomalous to the point of having context only within specific individual cases. Those that most need it can benefit least from it. Those that don't need it would use it well, but never need to. There's no paradox or Catch-22 involved, just an obvious axiom that proficiency in any avenue brings proficiency in all. Mediocrity brings its own lack of rewards and further, self-perpetuating mediocrity. What interests me is the response to that article and the comments it has spawned. And the degree to which they veer from the topic. And why that might be. And what that might tell us.

While it's possible for the sake of argument, though wildly incorrect scientifically, to posit two classes of trader reading these topics (a) pro totally successful (b) issue-ridden loss-racked losing wannabes, it's not immediately obvious to which of the two classes anyone belongs simply by what they post. But I can't be the only one reading between the lines and just able to make out the dim truth? I'd like to suggest another way of splitting the responses. Again, two classes, equally as unscientific as the first (a) those that have a grip on what it's all about AND want to help others (b) those that need help. There isn't anybody else here. Deciding which of those two classes each belongs makes short work of things.

 

[SOCRATES]

Psychological profiling of specific target groups such as this article attempts is futile. Any target group is anomalous by the nature of the wide-ranging aspects of constituents of that target group. Ultimately all psychotherapy and psychology is anomalous to the point of having context only within specific individual cases. Those that most need it can benefit least from it. Those that don't need it would use it well, but never need to. There's no paradox or Catch-22 involved, just an obvious axiom that proficiency in any avenue brings proficiency in all. Mediocrity brings its own lack of rewards and further, self-perpetuating mediocrity. What interests me is the response to that article and the comments it has spawned. And the degree to which they veer from the topic. And why that might be. And what that might tell us.

I agree with you so far.

While it's possible for the sake of argument, though wildly incorrect scientifically, to posit two classes of trader reading these topics (a) pro totally successful (b) issue-ridden loss-racked losing wannabes, it's not immediately obvious to which of the two classes anyone belongs simply by what they post. But I can't be the only one reading between the lines and just able to make out the dim truth? I'd like to suggest another way of splitting the responses. Again, two classes, equally as unscientific as the first (a) those that have a grip on what it's all about AND want to help others (b) those that need help. There isn't anybody else here. Deciding which of those two classes each belongs makes short work of things.

I disagree with you because all of this is about competing and not about sharing at all.

i, personally, have no difficulty in discerning which class is which according to the posting content and quality, because this is a dead giveaway. It is totally obvious to me, if to no one else.

 

[SOCRATES]

I think this work is like most of the stuff that is written about trading, you take the 5% that you may be able to use and discard the rest. It simply gives you a different perspective to think about things. Not being open to different perspectives, in my humble opinion, is a trait that is not conducive to profitable trading.

Yes, I agree, but this is relevant only during the process of evolvement, and thereafter becomes somewhat irrelevant, and finally totally irrelevant.