Its because this myth is so well known, i'm sure everyone knows when its a full moon if you work in a hospital. So you get a selection bias when the guy comes in with his arm chopped off, "ohh must be the full moon"..while on any other day no one would care what phase the moon is in. I'm sure no one says "ohh its a slow night tonight, must be the new moon".
Not to mention it makes no sense that there would be a binary effect as far as the moon goes..+/- 1 day from a full moon should be more bizarre than +/- one week...
The reason no one observes this is because its not really happening to start with.
The following user says Thank You to darthtrader3.6 for this post:
Confirmation bias (or myside bias) is a tendency for people to prefer information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses, independently of whether they are true. People can reinforce their existing attitudes by selectively collecting new evidence, by interpreting evidence in a biased way or by selectively recalling information from memory.Some psychologists use "confirmation bias" for any of these three cognitive biases, while others restrict the term to selective collection of evidence, using assimilation bias for biased interpretation.
The following 5 users say Thank You to gregid for this post:
Thanks to all members who left info and arguments regarding the full moon's effect/noneffect on humanity.It is all pretty interesting.I think I have bored and distracted the members long enough with luna-cy and should get back to my original post-that is,have any members tried the dozens of astro-based advisors,trading systems,Gann's "rediscovered lost secrets"etc.What have your experiences been?This is a smart crowd,obviously,and I find it's pretty hard to separate fact from fiction in this area.The ancient mathematical principles have value.All the stuff jerry-built on top of them and extrapolated from them by the swarms of Gann system carnival barkers seem pretty far fetched.Thanks,Mark.
I'm not sure what people that say god speaks to them has to do with anything. I know some people say hotdogs are good with relish. Is that relevant, too?
The brain is an over-generalizing pain avoider first, and a pleasure-seeker second. This is great if your criteria for success are: you eat, have sex, and don't get killed. And I can't deny that sounds like a pretty good day. But this is not optimal at all if you want to have a statistically correct view of your environment.
The "reality" the brain constructs for you often shatters in the face of simple measurement.
Again, if your standard of success is procreation before death, then yeah we've done pretty well for ourselves. Still, for example: when we are embarrassed at work, our body pumps out adrenaline and cortisol as if we are facing a life-threatening attack. oops... Nothing wrong with admitting that the brain is wired to make mistakes. Anyone who plays in the markets has experienced that many times, whether they know it or not.
The following 2 users say Thank You to Richard for this post:
Richard, I don't disagree at all that the brain can produce maladapted responses, and that these can have dangerous consequences, in or out of the markets. But, while our ability to see patterns, for example, may be a liability in some circumstances, it still proves fundamental in others.
My other point was simply that we have no way of determining a 'reality' apart from our own perceptions and mental constructions. I'm very happy to have 'statistically correct' descriptions, but they are also creations of our brains. And they can also be wrong.
Re: procreation, I suspect many people still view that as more important than producing correct descriptions....
We perceive things through our perceptions, in our minds. Yep. But while any mental construction could turn out to be false, they aren't all equally likely to turn out to be false. A rational person would always go with the statistical measure over the guesstimate, and a guesstimate over a daydream, and a daydream over a fabrication. It's irrelevant that those are all mental constructions, because everything is a mental construct (as you pointed out).
So, I'm afraid I don't see your point. In the conversation we were having in the thread, I was explaining that you can't just take the leaps your brain makes as fact. We know how unreliable our judgement is, and especially if you are investing money you owe it to yourself to collect data and back it up rationally. It was at that point of the conversation that you jumped in with statements about people that hear god. I just don't get it.