Day 97 of 100, Vol. 2

The reading group is successful and a great source of encouragement in my life. Once a month I have the opportunity of meeting with my fellows and having intelligent conversation using a work important to civilization as the prompt. The kinds of engagement that pursues is rarely achieved outside of the academy, and in distinction to university and college campuses, engaged in enthusiastically without attention split between the pursuit of truth and career and academic advancement. In the civilization I should like to be apart of these kind of conversations would occur while in the check out line of a super market. In our every quickly degenerating culture its good to have them at all. Our next meeting we will consider “The Laugh of the Medusa” written by Helen Cixous in a shared inquiry that is sure to be provocative.

I have found material that forms a nexus around human needs psychology and integral psychology which I am studying and it is providing boons. The work is immediately applicable to my case load. That said I have been thinking about reducing my hours and lightening my case load. Not now but in the future I will limit myself to nine clients. The reason for this is so that I can focus on writing and my fund both of which require a great deal of mental energy. Clients are like books and there lives become my business. Each one an individual enterprise. In the future I will have to lower my concerns so that I can produce greater quality. Quality not quantity is key to life.

This last month proved problematic for the trading methodology I have been testing for my futures fund. There are numerous complected components that I have integrated and would be impossible for me to model without a computer. Simply put if it wasn't for computers I would not be bothering myself with this venture. I have added two more filters for determining trading opportunities. There is good argument to be made to computerize the entry and exits so that they are executed automatically but I have human resistance to that notion. I think, perhaps incorrectly, given the difficulties around human error, that a human being should be at the trigger of those trades. Thus leaving one discretionary element in the game based on live human reason. Call me old fashion. But then caution is warranted as I am trading with live funds and if I have it correct in the next hundred days cycle I will have another income stream and profitable business which will require me to, as I have said already, lighten my other responsibilities.