I have to admit that investing, in at least the act of researching companies, does improve research skills and critical thinking. My motivations aren’t entirely money-driven, but there’s a clear correlation to those who have wealth and can possess far greater resources and gain power, with the information or research abilities they’ve developed. I’ve learned so much from those far smarter than I am. Being an investor is not so much different than the scientific endeavor and the philosophical inquiry for knowledge and truth. You have to stay aware of your own confirmation bias, look at multiple sides of any argument, and weigh your options. I don’t discriminate who I listen to, or where I get information from. If there’s an ounce of expertise, I will listen. I could learn from Adolf Hitler, all the way to someone altruistic like Mother Theresa, it makes no difference to me. I can separate the art from the artist, while being conscious of who’s behind the art and combine them back together again. It does not mean I necessarily agree with what the artist (person) says or represents, however, there is still something there to gather and learn from them.
I’m reminded of one of Gordon Gekko’s famous lines from the movie Wall Street (1987), “The most valuable commodity I know of is information.” Getting access to information has evolved rather rapidly, from the printing press in the fourteen century, to what we have now with computers in the twenty-first century. We rely extensively on information in this modern age where information is vastly abundant. The downside is that information tends to not be disseminated so clearly and with many sophistries. Thus, this abundance of information can stir up wild conspiracies, dissidents, and extremists to the untrained mind. The challenge of our time is separating the nonsense and bullshit to get at the truth, and discerning fake news from real facts. Independent and alternative media have risen in popularity because of the massive distrust in traditional media, and this is partly because a bunch of online and even traditional media outlets push content through so quickly, instead of a long, well-researched, and thoughtful article.
The infamous Steve Bannon, who borrowed from the classic instigator of news and the globalist’s agenda– Alex Jones, both use this phrase, “information warfare.” In a sense, their use of this phrase is right because information warfare to me is when misinformation and disinformation run rampant. This does not mean that their own news websites are not immune to spreading false information either. Sometimes information warfare is done on purpose to confuse or spread fear to the masses, which is a strategy that sounds like it comes straight out of Sun Tzu’s book on the Art of War. The investing communities experience something similar called FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt). At the same time, information warfare can be thought of as propaganda, censorship, information withholding, and even highly biased journalism.
A seeker of truth will need to carry a truthful objective compass that will guide them in navigating the vicious currents, and tidal waves of information. They will need to develop a bullshit meter to detect who is telling lies. In other words, they will need to become an expert sailor of information and an expert of human psychology. This means that the only navigation tools available at our disposal to deal with the swath of information we constantly receive at our fingertips is applying our minds at the margins. This entails being scientifically literate because science is a way of thinking, and to add on to that, philosophy also expands your mind into thinking deeply, which the end result is to hopefully develop a healthy skepticism. It is learning to ask meaningful questions, deeper questions, and cross-examining questions. It is reviewing or redoing previous research, reviewing your own research, and seriously questioning those of authority or experts. It is not to totally distrust everything and all authorities but to interrogate everything and everyone’s claims. It is a practice made popular in modern philosophy by Rene Descartes, who was having a mental-philosophical crisis, where he then proceeded to metaphorically reboot his mind to the point where he wasn’t sure of anything but of his own thoughts, “I think, therefore I am.”
To semi-borrow from George Carlin, what is critical of a healthy democracy is creating a population capable of critical thinking. Ten years ago, Michael Burry said, “It’s an age of infinite distraction for those so willing. You are the generation that has had instant messaging, Facebook, and Twitter nagging your fingertips at every moment. It’s been arguably as addictive as any drug throughout history.” To give an analogy, Getting to the truth is like going out at night when it’s extremely dark, and on top of that, there’s a dense fog stretching for miles clouding your judgment, and inhibiting your ability to see. The only thing by your side is merely a flickering lighted lantern and you are hoping that somehow you will find your way back home or to safety.
I have reconciled faith with science because I view science as the what and how, and faith is the meaning or the why. Science does not have the answer for everything, so far. Yet, meaning, interpretation, and faith/theology are subjective matters, these are what Neil Degrasse Tyson would call personal truths. On the other hand, science is an objective pursuit of competing truths (these are true no matter your beliefs), because the ultimate truth ultimately stands last and reigns supreme from intense scrutiny, fiery debates, and repeatable experiments for confirmation.
There are many lessons one can take from investing that apply to life and the handling of information. Warren Buffett probably said it best saying, “The most important quality of an investor is temperament, not intellect. You need a temperament that neither derives great pleasure from being with the crowd, or against the crowd.” I compare this wisdom to the yin-yang philosophy or in Taoism (the middle way), as in finding that middle sweet spot (balance). I describe it as the following: the individual has to be able to go against the crowd (contrarian/leader/independent), and also be able to go with the crowd (conformist/follower/dependent) and it can be used to understand the crowd. There are times when you have to lead the charge, times to follow; times to disband, and times to regroup or assemble and mobilize.
Social Scholarly 