I was searching though the hive blockchain today, doing what I do, (research purposes).
This post isn't about that - that was merely the spark of inspiration that led to writing this post.
Let's begin shall we ?...
Do you know why doctors don’t treat close relatives, or spouses?
Do you know why surgeons don’t perform surgery on close friends , relatives , or spouses?
Do you know why attorney's are always advised to take legal council in legal affairs's that concern themselves?
I'm sure you do know the reasoning that's behind this....
They are too close.
...Whether it be the friend or relative under the knife, or being too close to themselves, when under legal scrutiny.
All of them know that having skin in the game clouds their judgment.
Biases, whatever they may be - clouds clear thinking and the critical thought process....there are a million and one examples of clouded judgment leading to very poor decision making.
Logically - there is zero argument for 'having skin in the game' in some way allowing you to make better decisions or forecasts.
Personal bias is a known psychological reality.
It's one that actually prevents unbiased thought processes occurring.
Why the fuck then, does this seem to be the diametrically opposite perspective taken in crypto, and the Hive community?
Seriously?
Is it people pretending to be clever?.. feigning competence over idiocy?
And what then, does this say about their own agenda's?
There must be some element of gas lighting attached to it, that's for sure.
After all, it's attempting to use a false reality - One that 'skin in the game' somehow gives you more legitimacy - when it is actually shown that holding that position means the opposite in terms of objective reasoning.
The opposite of this is much, much, closer to the truth...
Repeating ‘having skin in the game’ doesn’t make the sentence more valid, no matter how much you make it a mantra.
Contrary to popular postmodernist belief, (and Goebbels from the well renown truth tellers called the Nazi party) , telling a lie often enough doesn’t make it the truth.
Repeating ‘having skin in the game’ doesn’t give your perspective more validity, it only tells others that you have a bias that will affect your perspective.
It doesn't give you more insights or more clarity of thought.
Using the real life examples that I've mentioned above - it shouts out at actually being the very opposite.
When doctors and surgeons find 'having skin in the game' detracts from being the best they can be - because of bias - but crypto nerds offer the diametrically opposite opinion – ...it really does put thinks into perspective, doesn't it?.
I can appreciate that many people on hive think know that they are far more intelligent than the world of surgeons and the volumes of work discussing how bias affects everything.
Why use logical facts that surgeons employ to avoid bias clouding their professional decisions, when you can just use postmodernism instead? (sarc)..
Just who are these people trying to convince?
Themselves?...Others ?..Or maybe it's both?
There ain’t nothing like a dufus with severe intellectual insecurities, desperately trying to convince the world they are not, in fact, a dufus.
(very possibly along with many other different insecurities, I'm sure - but we’ll keep the focus quite narrow on this one) .
... you'd think that they'd at least attempt to swathe their ignorant arguments in a thin veil of some critical thought, wouldn’t you?
...A few hours of studying this subject would avail them well in peddling untruths , using tricks to make them look legit....
It wouldn’t stand up to any rigorous dissection of course - but it might help persuade others who are not so circumspect , to swallow their guff.
The only thing that 'having skin in the game' tells you, is that bias is prevalent, and as such is very unlikely to be able to give unbiased information.
But hey - what would a brain surgeons and a hundred and fifty years of psychology know about it?
What would they know about how bias affects everyone and how it also directly affects the ability to apply critical thought to something - and thus leads to making poor judgments ?
"...It's difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary (or crypto fortune) depends upon his not understanding it..."
Transposing the saying above onto the crypto space (and hive ) ...and accepting the observable truth that 'having skin in any game does indeed affect good decision making, then the question left hanging, is this....
...Why would you choose to see someone as a legitimate (or wise) source of information, when their own biases are so heavily invested in seeing one particular outcome?
....Especially when their 'salary' (crypto stack), depends on it.
...When you find yourself failing time and time again...
What will it take for you to break a delusional state that empowers this failure ?
Bankruptcy ? destitution ? divorce ?...
Will any-fucking-thing at all ,in fact, ever break it ?
...Or is it a case that these people are so sure of their own intelligence - that they are 'the anomaly' in the whole of mankind - who can transcend their own biases and emotions?
Yeah... right...
Here's a tip on whether or not to swallow whatever your current gas lighting 'guru' has to offer...
....If 'they' ever refer you to to any mainstream media as being a good source of news information (CNN, BBC, Fox, etc)....
Alert! Alert!
On it's own , this may just show the naivety of an individual.
How so?
When a known liar - the MSM - is chosen to be believed - that then comes down to you and your own gullibility.
That kind of advice on it's own is not necessarily nefarious, even though that kind of advice would certainly be ringing some alarm bells if you had any sense.
More insidiously however - is the possibility that the guru may not actually believe the advice themselves, the advice that they're giving out...
And that raises some far darker questions.
On the assumption that your guru doesn't believe their own BS
that they're spouting - then this puts them firmly in the 'psychological manipulator' bracket.
What makes it dark, is that by the act of pointing you in a direction they know is patently false - it means that they are really trying to sell you something.
A false narrative, for starters.
They would be intentionally misdirecting you.
Who would do such a thing?
A good person?
Or bad person?
A person without any sense of moral responsibility to others is an evil person.
You can't feign intelligence without manipulation of some kind.
If you can only manipulate others by telling lies, and not your truth from your own perspective - then you're displaying a lack of morals.
Evidence of an evil person...
Using the 'Having skin in the game' as an argument is a good example of this.
It doesn't matter how wide their smile is , or how sexy they look, or how intelligent they try to appear to be.
Wheat from chaff.
FACTS FROM FICTION.
'Skin in the game' - when measured as some form of competence or that it gives you some higher insight or more legitimacy into a subject - is a patently false statement...
...This is backed up by so much information and evidence - both theoretical and practical - as to make it an observably idiotic statement.
Don't be taken in by charlatan's.
If you don't know what to look for, I'm here to help.
I know what to look for.
If you have doubts about any particular accounts - feel free drop me an email (in total confidence) - and I'll do my best to clarify any niggling doubts that you might have (free of charge).
From my observations, it seems that Hive is awash with 'less than authentic individuals', shall we say.
People who are trying desperately to appear as something else.
(....Ok, ok, 'awash with them' may be a tad hyperbolic - but you get the idea..).
