Just-world hypothesis "They didn't try hard enough." "It's their own responsibility."—I understand the urge to criticize in this way. However, this mindset has a critical flaw. In psychology, there's a bias called the "just-world hypothesis"—the belief that "the world is fair, and people get what they deserve based on their actions." When this belief becomes too strong, we overlook structural problems that cannot be resolved through individual effort alone. Looking back at the history of capitalism, markets have always contained inequalities and flaws. Yet at the same time, corrective forces have continuously worked to address these through institutional reforms such as labor laws and social security systems. And moving forward, efforts to remedy problems in existing systems will continue worldwide. What's crucial in investing is the ability to detect these "signs of change" early. When we remain unconsciously bound to the assumption that "current rules are absolutely correct," our thinking becomes rigid, and we face a higher risk of missing major structural shifts. Take the financial system, for example. For years, "information asymmetry" and "high intermediation costs" have been persistent challenges. Blockchain technology offers new solutions through decentralized mechanisms. Behind this, I believe, lies the ideal of expanding equal opportunities. If we accept the status quo as "natural" without critical examination, we'll fail to notice when society transforms, missing significant opportunities. To anticipate changes as investors and identify where value will emerge next, we must become aware of the "just-world bias" lurking within ourselves and view the world from multiple perspectives—this is essential.
- 0 replies
- 0 recasts
- 0 reactions
# Hindsight bias Bitcoin prices are currently plummeting. Social media is flooded with pessimistic comments, yet in early October, many people were optimistically declaring that "October is the strongest month." Strangely enough, Bitcoin itself hasn't changed at all. Its technology, mechanism, and supply remain the same. The only thing that has changed is the number called price. Yet our perspective shifts dramatically. This is a mental quirk called "hindsight bias." When people see results, they feel they "knew it all along." When prices rise, they say "I thought it would go up," and when they fall, "I knew this would happen." But in reality, no one was certain until that very moment. For example, it often happens that after receiving tokens through an airdrop and selling them immediately, the price subsequently skyrockets. At times like these, even I find myself thinking, "I knew from the start that project had potential. I should have known to hold onto it instead of selling." However, in reality, I had no idea about its future prospects when I received it—I sold precisely because I was uncertain. Knowing the outcome causes my uncertain judgment at the time to be replaced with "something I should have known." Another troublesome factor is "pro-cyclical psychology." When the market rises, our mood rises; when it falls, our mood sinks. And we convince ourselves that "it will keep falling like this." We fall into the illusion that recent events will continue forever. When you think about it calmly, it's strange. For instance, JPMorgan's market outlook for next year projects that risk assets will perform similarly to this year. Expert analysis doesn't say anything like "crash confirmed." Yet in moments when prices are falling, pessimistic views are spoken of as if they were the only truth. When prices fall, seeing pessimistic arguments while pausing to ask "is that really true?" When prices rise, maintaining composure amid the frenzy by thinking "wait a minute." Perhaps navigating markets successfully begins with understanding our own mental biases.
- 0 replies
- 0 recasts
- 0 reactions
Hyperliquid.
- 0 replies
- 0 recasts
- 0 reactions