Well said Jcandle! I agree with you 100% wholeheartedly that trading is indeed an ART not a SCIENCE. You have to feel and then learn the moves in order dance along with the flow if you don’t then you’re out. That might be a bit of an exaggeration. Thats how I see it.
Well I typed a long motivational response earlier on, but i’m not sure where it went. Here’s a summary:
I’m a third world student, 21, who goes to school in North America and has been trading forex for 16 months. I once went on a 9 month losing streak where I blew one account and blew 60% of the second account. At the beginning of June, I decided to come up with my own system. Since then, I have made about 4 times what I had on June 1st and I have cashed out all the capital I ever invested and took 26% profit. Now, I play with about 2,000 dollars of free money.
I have no idea whether trading should be objective, subjective, a game or a career but as long as you have a good profitable system, you are good. A good profitable system should be able to get you out of trades before a huge reversal and maximise your TP as much as possible. Finding a good profitable system is the million dollar question though and is harder than it sounds.
1 Like
Congrats on your first post it was a Doozy.
Thanks. I’ve been a lurker of this forum for months now but being a third world student that had a 9 month losing streak, i have so much in common with the poster that I just had to comment.
Dear aceofpips,
It’s really nice to meet you. Especially knowing the fact that we are the same age!
Certainly blowing an account or two can’t be the determining fact about how successful a trader can become but I really like to know more about how you came up with your system.
Please say more about the process.
There is a very nice order flow thread somewhere around this forum. Search for it! 
Well there is not Holy Grail in Forex but everything will help you to understand better the market.
So wait, you lost 5-6 trades and then you gave up on your first system/strategy and then you lost again 5-6 trades and giving up on your second strategy. Oh Gosh!
You need to believe in the system you use. If you don’t and if you give up after a couple of losses you won’t go anywhere in this business.
I don’t remember the actual number but do you know that even with a system that is right 80% of the time you can have a losing streak of 18 and more?
Food for thought.
You’re absolutely failing to understand this:
I said “Trading” shouldn’t be subjective.
I didn’t say my statements shouldn’t be subjective.
P.S. I should be really mentally powerful in this forum.
I’m posting a thread asking for encourage, instead some guys show up trying to find mistakes about “Aristotle Philosophy” in my words.
(Glad I’ve already passed that course in college 
)
The things that you read online or any advices that was given to you, always take everything with a " grain of salt". You will learn how to filter in those opinions and only take advices that it makes sense to you and it applies to you. I have been there and you will learn it eventually… Give it a time…
You’re right. And my “likes” definitely show filtration of the comments. But if I don’t comment back it will rep up their “Mr.Always Right” form of confidence.
Always learn to agree to disagree then leave it at that… Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but it’s up to you to take it or not
You can’t tell someone he is failing to understand something subjective, only because his opinion differs from yours, that’s the nature of subjective things. This is what I tried to point out in this sentence. Any way, it was just a comment, lol, nothing related to philosophy but the meaning of your words and the most basic reasoning. You started the debate between subjective and objective strategies and trading, not me. Next time don’t start a debate if you can’t accept other arguments than yours.
Well, I understand that this 1st comment annoyed you so I take it back . Now read the rest of the post, I don’t thing I said something discouraging or offensive. If you found it offensive, my apologies, it was not my intention.
paw3000 you mentioned a lot of things in your comments.
Let’s start with this:
Dude I think you have your monitor upside down!
Rotate it, then you will see who started the debate.
Now about “failing to understand”:
“subjectivity and objectivity are not strictly related to gut feelings.” is a subjective statement.
You think I’m wrong just because I don’t agree with your subjective statement.
You’re the one who believes I’m “Failing to understand” your subjective statement!
Good set of advices you gave away paw3000 and I advice you take a look at them yourself.
And thank you for the apologies. It shows your manners.
Nice one, it will make sense if this:
"subjectivity and objectivity are not strictly related to gut feelings."
would be a subjective statement. But it is not, as long as we agree with the standard meaning of gut feelings, subjectivity and objectivity.
Hahaha, Ty, I will.
It’s not subjective?
It’s the textbook definition of subjective! 
Post it to merriam webster and let me know the answer! 
And here’s a quote from differencebetween.com :
“Subjective is a statement that has been colored by the character of the speaker or writer. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through with the speaker views reality. It cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures.”
Read more: Difference Between Objective and Subjective | Difference Between | Objective vs Subjective Difference Between Objective and Subjective | Difference Between | Objective vs Subjective
Ask me to give you more resource if you want to study more.
By Order Flow do you mean Tape reading or are you talking about analysis based on previous structures and S/Rs?
“subjectivity and objectivity are not strictly related to gut feelings.”
I can prove it by logical.
Gut feelings are subjective, true? I think we agree on this point.
However not all the subjective subjects are gut feelings, for example, emotions, opinions, experience etc, are subjective by definition. If gut feelings are not the only subjective thing while this things are not gut feelings, then, we can affirm that subjectivity and gut feelings are different ideas. So “subjectivity is not strictly related to gut feelings.” remains true no matter what you think about it. Its a Fact. So, following the definition you posted, this sentence is not subjective.
There are at least another 25 ways to prove it, but now i think we are going far from offtopic. You know no one of us will give up, so we better end this discussion now, at the beginning of the weekend.
Without resentment, it has been a pleasure. Maybe at another time I will give you an advice about why I think you failed this last months and the ways to succes in this business. I have not forgot that you love my set of advices.
Good luck.
Oh my dear Paw3000. You started a beloved topic of mine and I’m not gonna let you get away with it.
So let me give you the answer. Then you have something to think about in the weekend.
These two sentences are objective. You’re right:
“subjectivity is not strictly related to gut feelings.”
“objectivity is not strictly related to gut feelings.”
But this one (the one you said earlier) is undoubtedly subjective:
“subjectivity and objectivity are not strictly related to gut feelings.”
Because Subjectivity and Objectivity are absolute complements.
What it means is, whether a statement is subjective or objective. And no statement can be found to be neither. And no statement can be both at the same time.
As the definition says gut feelings as a known matter is either subjective or objective.
Now which one it is, is everyone’s personal opinion because there is no way to prove it.
So saying: “Gut feelings is neither strictly subjective nor objective” not only is [U]logically wrong[/U] but also is subjective because it is your personal believe and there is no way to prove it.
I say logically wrong because what you said is just like saying:
“A dog is neither related to existence nor nonexistence.”
Maybe you’re confusion stems from the fact that subjective and objective don’t have the look of existence and nonexistence so you don’t understand the absolute complementing nature of them.
P.S. Any of your advice regarding forex is really welcome. Maybe in this field you can teach me something.
Have a good one.
Success in trading is very simple, one beyond a subjective understanding of the market, where you develop a “feel” for market movements.
Stev Petterson is a master at understanding order flow and take advantage of it,
Based on the understanding you have of the market, you can personalize the strategy that fits there and then.
The type of subjective understanding and feel for the market is based on experience “talent” correct kind of trading literature and thousands of hours in front of the screen …
Will the market range trend reversal blabla …
To use a metaphor David beckham kicking the ball 30 yards to his teammate the ball lands over again plus minus 20 cm front legs his fellow players, or Michael Schumacher brakes plus minus 15 cm in exactly the same place before the turn time after time …
Without a feel for timing so they would have never been famous
Beckham and schumacher are mathematical geniuses … A mathematician can figure out what they do but do not do the same …
Every time you take a trade you make a prediction that the market is going a sudden direction you can figure objective rules that you trade is based from indikators , but
Without the whole broader context of the price there and then who is a subjective prosess you are out of game …
[B]So it all boils down to the ability you have to READ the market …[/B]
You are having fun, aren’t you? I have given you the chance to end this, you should had taken it
There is a lot of homework to do there, lets summarize the 3 basic ideas i will point out:
- Your argument prove my statement is in fact objective.
- This argument is not reliable.
- You still fail to understand the original statement’s meaning.
1st of all some contradictory statements:
So they are subjective, not objective. They accomplish the definition of subjective but not the objective one: you can’t consider something objective if, like you said, “is everyone’s personal opinion because there is no way to prove it”.
Now start with the summary points:
[B]1. Your argument prove my statement is in fact objective:
[/B]
If this is logically wrong but there is no way to prove it, why dont you consider logical a way to prove that it is wrong? but at the same time you use it to say it is in fact wrong? Your arguments are contradictory. If by logic its wrong, then if the statement is wrong or not is no longer subjective but objective, following the definition you posted before. You may say my belief is subjective but not the sentence by itself.
1+1=2,5 this statement is objective, is false, but objective. That you believe that 1+1=2,5 does not turn the sentence subjective. Your opinion will be subjective but not the statement itself. If a statement is proved wrong by an accepted method, it means the sentence is objective.
If you dont believe me, check:
[I]OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE CLAIMS
An objective claim is a statement about a factual matter-one that [B]can be proved true or false[/B]. For factual matters there exist widely recognized criteria and methods to determine whether a claim is true or false. A subjective claim, on the other hand, is not a factual matter; it is an expression of belief, opinion, or personal preference.[B] A subjective claim cannot be proved right or wrong [/B]by any generally accepted criteria[/I]
from another source:
[I]Subjective claims & opinions
[B]In contrast to objective claims, subjective claims cannot be proved true or false by any generally accepted criteria.[/B] Subjective claims often express opinions, preferences, values, feelings, and judgments. Even though they may involve facts, they do not make factual (provable) claims, and therefore[B] they are, in a sense, neither true nor false in the same way an objective claim is true or false. They are outside the realm of what is verifiable. [/B][/I]
Some resources, if you are interested pls ask for more.
10
https://www.butte.edu/departments/cas/tipsheets/thinking/claims.html
So thank you for your interest on proving that my statement is in fact objective.
On the next post i will explain you why the argumentation you use to prove that my statement is false, is wrong.
[B]2. This argument is not reliable. [/B]
You consider objective and subjective to be absolute complements, this is your belief, so all the arguments and comparisons you developed next are based on your opinion, not on a correct an objective statement. This obviously prove nothing.
By the way, your assumptions about objective and subjective being absolute complements are more than arguable.
[I][B]The illusion of opposites[/B]
Since objectivity does not guarantee truth, and since subjectivity is not necessarily false, it makes sense that objectivity is not the exact opposite of subjectivity. Subjectivity and objectivity are different ways of knowing.
Mistaking subjectivity and objectivity as opposites can lead to problematic positions in philosophy, morality, and ethics.
[/I]
and more
[I]There is a false notion of subjectivity and objectivity in which these are conceived as opposed and mutually exclusive. They are opposed because of the imaginative schema of the subjective as ‘in here’ and the objective as ‘out there’; this is so common as to be almost universal. In the search for objective knowledge in the natural sciences and the human sciences, subjective elements in the researcher are to be eliminated; the objective is good, all subjective elements are bad and interfere with the ‘objectivity’ of results. In this case subjective lumps together everything that goes on in the mind, prejudice, bias, self-interest, as well as hypotheses, ideas, judgments, values. Knowledge becomes so objective, so logical, and so controlled by rules and methods, as to be able to do without human minds. Objectivity is to be attained by eliminating the subjective.
In this context the critical problem is inevitably presented in terms of a bridge between the subjective in here and the objective out there.
However, there is an alternative way of viewing the notions of subjectivity and objectivity, to view them as complementary rather than opposed. [/I]
You can ask me for more sources if you are interested.
Maybe they dont have the look of existance and nonexistance because they are not absolute complements, so this may explain why I don’t understand the absolute complementing of them, because it is just an ilusion created in your mind…
in conclusion, your arguments are not valid, including the comparison with dogs and existence, is not aplicable.
So, until now, we know your arguments have demonstrated that my sentence is objective, but, at the same time this arguments have been proved to be inaccurate.
[B]3.You still fail to understand the original statement’s meaning.
[/B]
We are again at the beginning, and the problem remains the same, you dont understand what i wanted to say with the original sentence. This is probably my fault, I apology, i’m not good at explaining things, and even less in other languages.
I’m not saying gut feelings are neither objective nor subjective.
I’m saying that the concept of objective and subjective does not always imply gut feelings. That’s all…
let me use your dog to put a clarifying example of the “underlying” of the problem:
The existence of a dog prove the existence of a mammal.
->True.
The existence of a mammal prove the existence of a dog.
->False.
I pointed out this relation:
A–>B
and you answered me with this one:
B–>A.
Subjectivity is not strictly related to a dog. ->Subjectivity may not be related to a dog.->
"subjectivity and objectivity "(the concept, the idea) may not be related to a dog.->
subjectivity and objectivity arent strictly related to a dog.
This relation is the one i was trying to point out when i made this statement.
And this is not the same than saying:
A dog isn’t strictly related to subjectivity and objectivity.
You said that trading must be objective if you dont want to involve gut feeling in your strategy.
Then i should answer you:
"Trading must not be a mammal if you dont wanna involve dogs in your strategy.
You that have been trading with bears would say: wtf is saying this fool. "
Something similar happened to me with gut feeling.
If I put “subjectivity and objectivity” was to make sure I let you know I was referring to the concept. But anyway the sentence stay objective one way or the other.
Do you finally understand my point? all this posts to “prove” something trivial…
Regards.
Ps:
LOL, looking back, i will admire anyone who takes the time and the determination to read and understand this 2 long and boring posts. This is what i wanted to avoid 2 posts ago.