Introduction
Part III in my little departure from an increasingly rigid road of market prediction was inspired by a conversation I had at my office Christmas party, though I was reminded of it by the repeated correspondence of world events with my choice of country for analysis.
I am used to being challenged when I mention my involvement in astrology. Those that don’t laugh outright attempt to engage me in debate along the lines of “if you think it works, explain and prove how.” I usually refuse to rise to the bait; it works for me and I would rather just play the markets with it than lock myself up in dusty academia to research the mechanics.
However, now and again, I have doubts myself. Not doubts about the effectiveness of my predictions but over what exactly contributes to them And the potential conclusion of such musings is far more troublesome and scientifically disturbing than astrology itself could ever be.
These troublesome musings were thrown into sharper focus at the aforementioned Christmas dinner, when the colleage to my right did not show scepticism about my forecasts, but went straight for the jugular. “Did I think that my predictions were right because astrology worked or for some other reason?” I, expecting the usual doubting Thomas, responded that if he thought that I was solely using economic or business expertise, how did he account for the fact that some of my best predictions in 2008 were for Japan, a country which I have neither visited nor understand politically or economically. His response? He did not mean economic expertise, he meant something akin to psychic powers!
I am used to being challenged when I mention my involvement in astrology. Those that don’t laugh outright attempt to engage me in debate along the lines of “if you think it works, explain and prove how.” I usually refuse to rise to the bait; it works for me and I would rather just play the markets with it than lock myself up in dusty academia to research the mechanics.
However, now and again, I have doubts myself. Not doubts about the effectiveness of my predictions but over what exactly contributes to them And the potential conclusion of such musings is far more troublesome and scientifically disturbing than astrology itself could ever be.
These troublesome musings were thrown into sharper focus at the aforementioned Christmas dinner, when the colleage to my right did not show scepticism about my forecasts, but went straight for the jugular. “Did I think that my predictions were right because astrology worked or for some other reason?” I, expecting the usual doubting Thomas, responded that if he thought that I was solely using economic or business expertise, how did he account for the fact that some of my best predictions in 2008 were for Japan, a country which I have neither visited nor understand politically or economically. His response? He did not mean economic expertise, he meant something akin to psychic powers!
Psychic powers? You are joking right....?
Now, setting aside that there is no single, conclusive definition of what psychic powers comprise, let’s run with the idea. I have noticed, myself, when reviewing my forecasts in retrospect, after they have been realised, that I am sometimes at a loss to easily explain how I formed a judgement regarding a particular date. Although hindsight should be clearer, sometimes it isn’t…..
In order to recreate the forecast I have to recreate the process of getting there, not to just look at the date in question. When analysing a chart over a period, it is not a series of discrete events but a story that evolves and grows as I move forward in time. Themes emerge month-on-month in a way they can’t if I just look a specific date in isolation. Now this might be because that is how astrology is supposed to work: but it might not.
In order to conduct an analysis over a long period, I need to focus on a chart and its transits for some hours. Normally during that process I am uninterrupted and reach a level of concentration that I don’t in other matters (certainly not in my excessively dull day job). Essentially, it is a form of meditation. The question then is, under the meditative state, am I able to channel information not available to the normal conscious mind?
And of course if I can do so, presumably so can others. Even allowing for the fact that the ability to express and interpret such “universal information” might benefit from a reasonable level of financial knowledge, the fact remains that channelling information about the future from the universe is not accepted as scientifically possible. Clearly a can of worms has been opened. That will be $1m, thanks very much, Mr Randi.
Now, setting aside that there is no single, conclusive definition of what psychic powers comprise, let’s run with the idea. I have noticed, myself, when reviewing my forecasts in retrospect, after they have been realised, that I am sometimes at a loss to easily explain how I formed a judgement regarding a particular date. Although hindsight should be clearer, sometimes it isn’t…..
In order to recreate the forecast I have to recreate the process of getting there, not to just look at the date in question. When analysing a chart over a period, it is not a series of discrete events but a story that evolves and grows as I move forward in time. Themes emerge month-on-month in a way they can’t if I just look a specific date in isolation. Now this might be because that is how astrology is supposed to work: but it might not.
In order to conduct an analysis over a long period, I need to focus on a chart and its transits for some hours. Normally during that process I am uninterrupted and reach a level of concentration that I don’t in other matters (certainly not in my excessively dull day job). Essentially, it is a form of meditation. The question then is, under the meditative state, am I able to channel information not available to the normal conscious mind?
And of course if I can do so, presumably so can others. Even allowing for the fact that the ability to express and interpret such “universal information” might benefit from a reasonable level of financial knowledge, the fact remains that channelling information about the future from the universe is not accepted as scientifically possible. Clearly a can of worms has been opened. That will be $1m, thanks very much, Mr Randi.
I think, therefore you aren't
However, if you find that disconcerting, the explanation could be even worse. I’ve poked around in this particular worm can before. A few years ago, an astrologer friend and I pondered the subject of myriad astrological techniques and the existence of so many predictive and religious belief systems. It seemed to us that, for the believer, the chosen system always works. But the logical conclusion of this is that the world becomes exactly what we believe it will. Now I am aware that this is the premise behind the literature relating to the so called “law of attraction.” But that does not take things to their final conclusion…... namely, that our whole world is the creation of our minds and nothing but that mind exists.
In such a scenario, astrology only exists in my mind, and in my mind it works. And similarly astrology’s detractors are all products of my mind. As are you, my reader. Explanation, simple: upshot, terrifying.
Obviously the much vaunted law of attraction becomes irrelevant under the above scenario. If nothing exists, who cares? There is nothing to attract. And whether astrology exists, well, who cares? There is no solar system or universe. And whether the Dow will rise or fall in 2009, who cares? There is no Dow. And whether you are reading this, who cares? No-one cares, you aren’t, you don’t exist…….
But supposing you did, wouldn’t you be beginning to see that astrology is a much lesser evil?! So having peaked under the lid, I prefer to leave the worms in the can and carry on with the astrology.
However, if you find that disconcerting, the explanation could be even worse. I’ve poked around in this particular worm can before. A few years ago, an astrologer friend and I pondered the subject of myriad astrological techniques and the existence of so many predictive and religious belief systems. It seemed to us that, for the believer, the chosen system always works. But the logical conclusion of this is that the world becomes exactly what we believe it will. Now I am aware that this is the premise behind the literature relating to the so called “law of attraction.” But that does not take things to their final conclusion…... namely, that our whole world is the creation of our minds and nothing but that mind exists.
In such a scenario, astrology only exists in my mind, and in my mind it works. And similarly astrology’s detractors are all products of my mind. As are you, my reader. Explanation, simple: upshot, terrifying.
Obviously the much vaunted law of attraction becomes irrelevant under the above scenario. If nothing exists, who cares? There is nothing to attract. And whether astrology exists, well, who cares? There is no solar system or universe. And whether the Dow will rise or fall in 2009, who cares? There is no Dow. And whether you are reading this, who cares? No-one cares, you aren’t, you don’t exist…….
But supposing you did, wouldn’t you be beginning to see that astrology is a much lesser evil?! So having peaked under the lid, I prefer to leave the worms in the can and carry on with the astrology.
Comments