April 14th, 2007, 12:03 pm
QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerI wonder if this blogger has gone cracked, or if he just believes he is God like the average left-winger:QuoteThe epidemic of recent articles in the press about neurolaw and responsibility made me decide to believe in two contradictory ideas: 1. I will treat people as though they are responsible for their actions. {If they aren't, then I am not responsible for my action of treating them as they they're responsible.} 2. People are in the grip of forces beyond their control and can't help what they do, so they all deserve the mercy of God.What would this guy do if he were pinned under a rock? Lie there unharmed in his infinite wisdom? Or hold the rock responsible and push it off?I don't know what kind of person thinks he has the choice to not hold people responsible for their actions, maybe one with infinite wealth. But if some guy were to empty my bank account, for example, I would track him down, smack him to the ground and get my money back, and cut his hands off so he couldn't do it again.What kind of person even wonders these things?There is rarely anything approaching sense or wisdom in the finance community - but glad to see Mr Derman has it. The above remark is not just trivial observation, as some seem to question here, but careful and considered judgement.It says something about the finance community as a whole that Mr Derman has reached these conclusions after retirement. Many a moral system or code of beliefs is encompassed within the above two statements. Some people are born with deeper insight and ability to process subtle issues better than others. My nephew stated - at the age of 10 - what Mr Derman states now at 60. Some reach it at 80, and some never.Life is always a balancing of point, and counter-point. For every metaphor or adage there is an opposing one. "Out of sight, out of mind" or "absence makes the heart grow fonder", depends on the context.It is the ability to hold opposing views in your mind, and be able to employ them within context that is the hall mark of wisdom. That is all Mr Derman states. It is actually not a contradiction. It is just that we are brought up in simple minded ways asserting the superiority of one idea over another. Often they are not superior or inferior, but complementary.For you quants out there, maybe a technical rephrasing of Mr Derman's statement would clarify. People make choices under constraints. Choice implies responsibility and accountability. Constraints imply mitigating circumstances. Our lives are stochastic trajectories criss crossed with those of others. We have a feeback control element at every step - choice in other words. This is neither optimal nor perfect. 6 billion agent employing control at every point in crisscrossing trajectories - some with more control, others with little. So people must have accountability for their actions, but context in terms of constraints is also important.I think that is all Mr Derman is saying. And it is not a trival observation.
Last edited by
flairplay on April 13th, 2007, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.