See, I disagree with the whole power of positive thinking mindset. Positive thinking and focusing on the upside can be disasterous. I know you touched on properly gauging risks, but there’s a reason they call Charlie Munger the Abominable ‘No’ Man. And you can ask any quarterback about the impact of a poorly timed interception because they tried to push something when they shouldn’t have. Balance is key.
You can’t be serious. How can you disagree with positive thinking? No one is suggesting you approach a decision with that sort of mindset. In that regard, over optimism and positivity can absolutely be dangerous. You’ll likely take on challenges that you shouldn’t have and end up flat on your back more than once. But, how in the world can you disagree with approaching a decision as pragmatically as possible and then after deciding to move forward following thoutful consideration, you maintain positive thinking (unless some serious new information comes about).
NFL quarterbacks wouldn’t even be NFL quarterbacks if it weren’t for positive thinking (or most professional atheletes for that matter). Think about how much time, effort, sweat, and pain goes into getting to that level. You can bet your butt there was a whole lot of positivity going on there - a sense that they knew they could do it, that they had it in them. Positive thinking is what fuels success, but you can’t just be stupidly optimistic. I don’t think anyone disagrees there.
Yeah, I’m not advocating “be positive at all costs,” or as rayankh said “stupidly optimistic” so that you ignore risks. I’m only saying that there are extra costs to having a negative default about stuff that you set yourself up for failure before you even start.
Munger can be Mr. No on stuff, but as part of an organization or process. If he were always “no unless we have proof of safety,” they would never pull the trigger on anything.
Yeah, that’s right. It was Gretsky who said that, though I wonder if Jordan re-used the quote as well, since I’ve heard it attributed to him too.
@ BS and bchad
I think we’re splitting hairs on the whole “having a postive mindset argument” Everyone has hopes to achieve whatever it is they are going for. It could be a .001% hope or 95% hope, it’s more like a scale than a absolute shut off.
I say the best approach: Analyze your chances (risk and reward). if you decide to go for something, do your best to get it, until the result will be revealed. Keep the “hope” aspect on the side, just focus on the doing.
I admit this sometimes creates wild goose chases and following near-impossible dreams, but it would be sad to get old and knew there was a chance at something great and not even try.
I mostly disagree with this also. I often hear how great athletes have short memories. An average player screws up and it’s on his mind the rest of the game to the point where he’s scared to make another mistake. Great athletes just go back on the field as if nothing happened 5 minutes ago.
Great Post Greenman. Goodluck to you. Just love the attitude… I’m sure you’ll scale the summit.!
You gotta think that if professional athletes were not innately positive thinkers, they probably would never have gone the pro-route anyway. Think of what you have to give up in order to become a pro- quality player. Then think of what the chances are of making it there. Had they suppressed a positive attitude towards uncertainty and the odds, they almost certainly would have said something along the lines of “screw this, it’s a lot safer to do accounting.”
-
Better career prospects
-
Better career prospects
-
Better career prospects
I guess that’s about it.
Well, that’s my view anyhow. I stand by it, and disagree with a lot of the points, but don’t really feel like arguing this. Particularly since as Iteracom pointed out, this will likely devolve into something semantic. In my experience, discussions about positive thinking and cheerleading always seemed to be pretty far removed from where the actual work was getting done, but that may or may not be representative of what actually goes on.
Interesting fact: Positive thinking practices, as embodied in positive self statement, have actually been shown capable of doing harm to low self esteem individuals
Dr Wood suggests that positive self-statements cause negative moods in people with low self-esteem because they conflict with those people’s views of themselves. When positive self-statements strongly conflict with self-perception, she argues, there is not mere resistance but a reinforcing of self-perception. People who view themselves as unlovable find saying that they are so unbelievable that it strengthens their own negative view rather than reversing it. Given that many readers of self-help books that encourage positive self-statements are likely to suffer from low self-esteem, they may be worse than useless.
I took L1 when I was in my MSF program mainly because I got a fee waiver through the school’s scholarship and there was a ton of overlap between school and L1 curriculum. Made it easy to study and pass with minimal extra time effort. Continued on L2 since I still had the time and at the time I registered I was still unemployed. Since then I had a job I hated for a year in Big 4 and now have a better job in research. I’ll probably take L3 next year since I do only have 1 level left and I would like to complete the program, especially since I’m young and have the time for it (I’m 23).
What’s your end goal with having the CFA?
nice…:)…i agree
Read it in Morgran Freeman voice, really heart touching stuff!
I am 33 yrs. old, took a break after the birth of my daughter, and have been job hunting for the past 2 yrs. With a prev. work ex. of 2 yrs. in a KPO, an MBA from a second rung institute, CFA seemed my only way out or rather, which would indicate to a recruiter that I am serious about a career. It has been tough going so far (didn’t clear CFA L1) due to plenty of RL issues, but am thinking of giving it a go again in Dec. this year. It’s expensive, involves too much hard work and I hate not being able to give time to my kid as much as I want to, but yeah, I loved going through the material, love equity research (prev. work ex. was related to that), so, yeah, am hopeful.
As I say, I am foolish and am willingly putting myself on the chopping block, so to speak.
@Greenman: I admire you.Kudos to your willpower!
that is how boring my life is…
one reads 10-12 pages an hour; there’s 7500 pages in the curriculumn, which requires 625-750 hours of reading. more time for doing questions. congratulations on passing without having to read everything. please share your secret… regards, Albi
I didn’t read the CFA books. I also skimmed sections where I knew the material already, like derivatives, economics, many parts of fixed income, etc. Ethics is pretty much the same for all three levels and does not need extensive re-study.
please elaborate
Unless it is VASTLY different for various levels, there are only about 3000 pages in the curriculum (for Level 1 anyway).
And if there are double the amount of pages for level 2 or level 3, I think I will start crying now.