|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Or put more simply, come up with a few specific rules that can be programmed in Trade
Station (or equivalent) so that their effectiveness may be judged objectively and
without emotion.
--
,-._|\ Richard
/ Oz \
\_,--.x/
v
David Cicia wrote:
>
> The point is not that there be no subjective interpetations at all but
> that the range of possible subjective interpretations in Astrology is much
> much larger than for interpreting, say RSI, and it is therefore extremely
> prone to subjective projections, i.e. you put something there from your own
> psyche that isn't there in the data.
> For instance, what does mars conjunt the moon mean? Mars has a range of
> meanings from aggressiveness to warlike to instigating to panic, etc. etc.
> Moon has a similar range of meanings. The aspect of conjunction has its own
> broad range of meanings. Put these 3 together and you have such a broad
> spectrum of possible meanings that, in my opinion, it is not possible to
> get any kind of indication for trading from it.
> That's all.
>
> David Cicia
>
> At 07:44 AM 4/26/98 -0600, R.Griess wrote:
> >David Cicia wrote:
> >
> >>What I'd like to see is specific correlations and precise indications,
> >>not subject to subjective interpetation.
> >
> >RT's,
> >
> >The above quote was used in a post about astrology. As I read it, I said
> >to myself: "Golly, the quest for the Holy Grail".
> >
> >While the quote itself was directed at astrology, could it not apply to
> >virtually every technical indicator, computerized system or even Delta
> >(since that has been a hot topic here recently)? The key phrase is
> >subjective interpretation!!
> >
> >I might interpret a stochastic one way and you another. Or, you might
> >interpret a RSI one way and I another. System trader XYZ might use a
> >system one way while system trader ABC might use the same system another
> >way. Norman might interpret the stars one way and Arch Crawford another.
> >SUBJECTIVE INTERPRETATION!!
> >
> >Is there such a thing as specific correlations that stand up??
> >
> >I don't pretend to have the answers......., but would welcome suggestions
> >as to where to look.
> >
> >Ron
> >
> >
> >
> >
|