Even if chance temporarily favors you, any progress would likely soon be lost if your habits are not in order.
Most are an obvious product of their general environment, wherein if the markets are bullish, they are, and vice versa.
Anti-speculative narratives may be adopted after the bull market ends, but usually not in a healthy or knowledgeable manner.
Simply knowing this is rarely enough to serve as protection.
Because although we are usually cognizant of others – the fact that they are “emotional” and “unsound” – it is less common that we recognize it in ourselves.
But, that is more a matter of fixing it in the act. Why not simply never do so in the first place?
I think it’s usually a knowledge problem. If you are not knowledgeable on a certain topic but wish to leverage it for your gain, as soon as a compelling narrative comes across your doorstep, you latch onto it.
But alas, writing or reading a detailed explanation of poor practices is not exactly the best use of one’s time, I think.
Rumination, thinking about past ignorant mistakes for too long, is rarely the most productive use of your time. So, what is more effective?
It’s hard to say. Non-specificity is a boring thing and for good reason.
Maybe that’s an error on my part. Just as many schools now try to teach how to learn effectively, the way in which one is conditioned into learning what one doesn’t know, to leverage opportunities, is the answer to being more productive. It’s mostly a habit thing though.
If ineffective so far, clearly one has not been conditioned to learn as a habit to the extent of being able to deduce the relevant probabilities.
If you are incapable of deducing it because you don’t know enough about the surrounding topic area, Buffett says it’s usually just better to move on to something you are more familiar with if the opportunity cost of learning about it is high or quite unknowable regardless.
