--- --- *"Luck and risk are dopplegangers."* - [[The Psychology of Money]] Chapter 1 This reminds that it can be hard to be successfully [[Making Meaning]] of outcomes, since [[Understanding is wise performance]] and [[understanding is mostly a process of clearing up misunderstanding]]. So as an educator and investor it is tempting to try to protect the learner from the pain of [[Learning]], but that's the only way to learn. It's kind of like [[cognitive biases]] including the [[Association is not causation]], and the [[Fundamental Attribution Error]], assuming others intended the outcomes and we intended the effort. This is a way of seeing the world, the outcomes are more to do with things outside our control in complex [[Systems]], making it hard to tell with hindsight what was genius and what was luck, or what was stupidity vs what was bad luck. When the [[chaos monkey]] comes only systems with [[Antifragility]] will be successful, and the chaos monkey comes when you least expect it. This matters because it becomes then hard to tell who to learn from. We need to get [[beyond "did it work?"]] as a way of [[Assessing]]. [[competence and confidence are not linked]], and if luck is combined with confidence we can easily be swayed by someone who is misleading. We should get into evaluating the [[Thinking]] behind the choices, assessing also the [[choice architectures]] used, how [[our environment shapes our behavior]] and the outcomes, and consider what might get in our way of success so we can [[Eliminate before optimize]] those obstacles. ##### What would the opposite argument be? tags: #note/idea | #on/outcomes | #on/investing | #on/psychology ##### Sources: