"Science is systematized knowledge . . . Art is knowledge made efficient by skill."
The art of Trading MAs 880 replies
The Zen art of trading 24 replies
The Art of Trading with MTF Stochastics 1016 replies
Trading: Part Science and Part Art 28 replies
DislikedI like your way in putting in an argument..... But here's my challenge, but promise not to get mad over it http://cdn.forexfactory.com/images/s.../yim/happy.gifIgnored
DislikedTrading is definitely an art. The human brain is much more complex than any computer that has ever been built. A computer can crunch numbers faster than any human can, but it has limited ability to interpret data. For instance, there are some types of trendlines on a chart that can only be interpreted by a human. I realize that there are some types of software that can draw basic trendlines...but the art of interpreting and applying trendlines on a chart is very complex.Ignored
DislikedWhat you view is your reality. How much do science knows about subconcious?Ignored
No matter how much I practise, I will never be able to paint like Picasso, work a fretboard with the speed and feel of Jimi Hendrix, dance like the late Michael Jackson, write children's books with the imagination of JK Rowling, play a Hollywood role as effortlessly or convincingly as Robert de Niro, or hit a tennis ball as well as Roger Federer. These folk are artists.Ignored
So the question becomes: does trading involve the expression some kind of innate skill or talent, or is it merely an intellectual process that can be learned by anybody? If it's nothing more than the latter, then in my opinion it's pure science.Ignored
DislikedIf I'm mad, then it's insanity (due to too much chart study, and impending old age), not anger. LOL.
Ok, just to clarify any possible misunderstanding, here's how I see it:
1. Things that can be shown to be universally objective (e.g. 2+2=4) and/or quantifiable: we both agree that is science. OK so far?
2. Things that are subjective or discretionary, but nonetheless involve conscious, logical thought: I see that as a kind of science, or at least something that could be investigated by scientific process, but you see it as art. Am I correct?...Ignored
DislikedSomething missing from my previous definition:
For me, art is something that involves physical prowess or skill, or the expression of an innate gift, flair or talent that one is born with. No matter how much I practise, I will never be able to paint like Picasso, work a fretboard with the speed and feel of Jimi Hendrix, dance like the late Michael Jackson, write children's books with the imagination of JK Rowling, play a Hollywood role as effortlessly or convincingly as Robert de Niro, or hit a tennis ball as well as Roger Federer. These folk...Ignored
DislikedWhy would science become art simply because a biological computer is performing the calculations?
I think 2+2=5 (just noticed we both used this one Hanover!). Perception does not make reality. Reality, by definition, is how things are, and not how we think they are. My perception does not necessarily reflect reality, and that is why I'm driven to learn. The more pieces I put together, the better chance I have at being able to see the big picture.
Show a group of people a picture, and some will say it is a duck, while others say it is a...Ignored
DislikedNo reality could exist without perception. How could it?Ignored
DislikedThe fact remains: You're making bold claims about trading on gut feeling with no analysis/triggers, telling us that all analysis is a waste of time and we should just look at price and guess its future direction, because we have an inner ability to predict things very well when having very insufficient information.Ignored
DislikedThanks, folks, for your replies.
I still see my own approach to market analysis as being more science than art, but I won't attempt to defend that position; I'm just expressing my opinion. All that matters to me is that I continue to learn more about market behavior, and become more proficient in my trading; whether others want to label that 'science' or 'art' doesn't bother me.
While I see analysis as science, I believe that successful trading also involves one's personal psychology.
Making trading decisions purely on intuition is a complete...Ignored
DislikedReality exists independent of life. A planet, for example, does not need a giraffe to see it for the planet to exist. Reality is what is, perception is how life views it.Ignored
DislikedThat I have to agree with
But a person's reality, or what he thinks is the real reality, isn't necessarily The Reality.
Because we always perceive things through our subjective mind, which based on our past experiences, thus, our so-called reality is but perceived reality that is always biased.
Tell the guy from 200AD the earth is round and he'd laugh at you. The earth is only round - to us - until we perceived it.Ignored
DislikedActually, just to add another thought to this. Is it fair to say that your method is most effective when the Asian session has been in tight range and least effective when it has moved the market more significantly?Ignored
DislikedThank you gentleman, you have made a very good point there!
My concept of approaching trading as "art" frees up one from getting too "attached" by every trend break, doji, patterns, etc.
Because, you could put 2 traders with the chart and get a diffrent analysis, trend lines, etc.
Of course, its never meant for one to trade with pure intuition. I still use fibs et al day in day out. But instead of depending on the them, I use them freely, just to what I "see", at discretion. I also keep in mind that fibs, trends, etc are meant to be...Ignored
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|