Decision-Making Process VI

We now come to the pivotal phase: ‘The Presencing’.

Up till now, the strategy has been one of letting go:

  • Move beyond our mindsets and
  • Squarely face reality. In facing reality we
  • Use both our right and left brain as well as our emotions.

In this phase, we begin the process of ‘letting come’. The information we have accepted will crystallize into into a series of possibilities – our job in this phase is just to note them.

In my case, the practical actions I take are to brainstorm for two reasons:

  • why my favoured scenarios may be unlikely and
  • what I have to see to prove them wrong.

At the beginning of this stage, I have done a right-left brain analysis with an open mind. In the process, l have formed a reasonably firm view of the action I shall take in the current market conditions. In other words, the ideas ‘have come’.

To let the ideas ‘come’ without blindsiding myself, I play the Dcvil’s advocate to come up with:

  1. list of benchmarks that may cause ‘the idea/ideas’ formed to be re-examined immediately or
  2. a set of benchmarks that may cause ‘the idea/ideas’ to be re-examined if the benchmarks occur.

Tomorrow we’ll examine the next phase by which we enhance the benchmarks to a set of criteria for action.

1 thought on “Decision-Making Process VI”

  1. Ray

    It is not surprising you often assume the role of the Devil’s Advocate, being a lawyer by training, too.

    A devil’s advocate is someone who takes a position, sometimes one he or she disagrees with, for the sake of argument. This process can be used to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure.Unquote

    It is akin to dialectics, a method of argument which has been central to both Eastern and Western philosophy since ancient times. The word “dialectic” originates in Ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato’s Socratic dialogues. Dialectic is rooted in the ordinary practice of a dialogue between two persons, each of whom holds different ideas and wishes to persuade the other.

    The presupposition of a dialectical argument is that the participants share at least some meanings and principles of inference in common, even if they do not agree.

    Hence, this form of argument applies equally effective to technical analysis to reach a high probability trade opportunity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *