"It is
clear, then, that the idea of a fixed method, or a fixed theory of
rationality, rests on too naive a view of man and his social
surroundings." ~ Paul Feyerabend
Recently, I was chatting over coffee with a friend, who happens to be a psychologist. We were discussing the inter-relationships and overlaps of his profession and mine, and he capped our conversation by commenting, "We are all naive scientists."
This idea struck me as profoundly evident, yet uncommonly recognized, in the human condition. I quickly thought of examples of this naivety in personal finance and investing.
Naturally, I asked my psychologist friend to expand more on this "naive scientist" idea as it pertains to human behavior. He said, and I paraphrase, that "The basic idea is that all sciences strive to Describe, Explain, Predict and Control" and that "formal sciences are extensions of what we try to do every day anyway."
Obviously, the problem with this behavior is that most of us go about naively describing, explaining, predicting and controlling without the benefit of methodologies, theories and developed tools applied in formal scientific practices. Even worse, some of us adopt others' (or even create our own) methodologies, theories or tools with little or no thought as to the proper application or suitability for our particular use -- or even when science need not or should not apply.
"We do not need science and philosophy to know what we should do to be honest and good, yea, even wise and virtuous." ~ Immanuel Kant
After giving this conversation with my psychologist friend further thought, I concluded that, even if we were all brilliant and accomplished scientists, it would still be a mistake to submit to the desire to apply
science where science may not apply.
Science, like philosophy, is quite logical in nature and does not often lend itself to describing, explaining, predicting or controlling those things that are non-logical in nature, such as human emotion. So when we go about trying to apply science to our life experiences, it is more likely than not that we are acting naively.
"We have to recognize accident, i.e., the fact that there is no formula, no 'principle', which covers all things; that there is no totality or system of things. And this recognition at once supports a life of 'responsibility and adventure' and leads to scientific discovery." ~ John Anderson
Search is something we do when we are looking for something; Discovery is something that occurs when
something we may not have been searching for finds us; and Science is an extension of our human
desire to search for answers and to find shortcuts to those answers so
we may use those shortcuts again when we need them later.
Even in the realm of formal science, some of the greatest discoveries in history were not planned -- they were "accidents;" yet a life consisting of waiting around for these wonderful and random accidents to occur is
not prudent either.
Certainly there is a case to be made both for and against scientific applications to various life experiences -- and the world of personal finance and investing is no exception to this observation.
Balance, therefore, is the non-scientific but prudent life application -- a balance of responsibility and adventure -- that is up to the individual to define. One simply needs to obtain the necessary level of self-awareness, combined with a bit of humility, to acknowledge and overcome their naive scientist tendencies.
-----------------------------------
Related Posts:
Know Thy Risk
Enabling Opportunities
Balancing Responsibility & Adventure