Analysis Of Michael Burry's ' Un / Conventionalism '

1283 Words Feb 3rd, 2016 6 Pages
The theme for this week’s readings have generally followed the notion of conventionalism, and not being allured into its convenient explanations. The excerpt from The Big Short exemplifies Michael Burry’s obsessive pattern recognition to uncover (and to an extent create) an unusual investment strategy to make millions following a market bust. The other reading, from Freakonomics, uses the framework of economics to explain unusual social phenomena that otherwise go unquestioned by the masses. Steven Levitt explains, through the incentive of a glamorous lifestyle, drug dealers end up making less than minimum wage causing them to live at home. In the context of this class, the lesson from these readings are readily apparent: call out convention. To excel and prosper in any field, one must embrace the unconventional and seek unlikely patterns. But in taking away this apparent lesson from these readings, I want to avoid glorifying the unconventional. What I felt I’ve learned is to not be bounded by the dualism of conventional versus unconventional. Rather, inquire great questions, read extensively, and let the questions take you in, around, and outside of convention.
Steven Levitt in Freakonomics strives for anything outside of convention, as he applies his background in economics to answer unusual questions (particularly focused on crime). In the chapter we were assigned, Levitt explains the financial statements of a gang’s drug dealing activities, and how…

More about Analysis Of Michael Burry's ' Un / Conventionalism '

Open Document