Reply to thread

In defense of all ‘contrarians’


For anyone with unbiased interest in hearing both sides of ‘quant finance’, bigbadwolf serves as a refreshing contrarian voice on this forum that seems to balance out what some may perceive on part of some “newbies” as unquestioning faith in what has already been proven to be a very shaky paradigm (i.e., unknowing and unquestioning, and therefore probably incomplete understanding of mathematics). For those few who seem to represent the hubris and arrogance of the quants and probably most of the recent problems associated with their criticism, it may be advisable to closely study philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of calculus to recognize the failure on the part of what Buffet characterized as ‘formula driven quants.’ The problem as always seems not to be with knowledge or techniques such as mathematics, quantitative finance, or algorithms but with those who are not yet prepared to know how to handle them effectively. As one who has had the privilege of seeing some of the world’s greatest 'contrarian' dealmakers (whose bets literally moved the world: such as the big short of the British pound and the invention of junk bonds) use some of one’s own risk ventures, I think that because of bigbadwolf and other veterans of Quantnet such as Alain, Andy, etc., QuantNet seems to be the most ‘balanced’ extant social community of quants who laudably aren’t afraid of taking a necessarily cautious and somewhat skeptical view of their trade while mastering it.


Back
Top Bottom