I am confused by “if-only” and “ceteris-paribus”. They seems to be the same thing to me. If-only: “I would have been right if xxx hadn’t happened” ceteris-paribus: “I would have been right if the situation hadn’t change (all else the same)” Oh, it is so confusing
think about this way. “if fed wouldnt drop interest rates, my shorts would pay off”. That is if defense. ceteris-paribus (no credit crunch, no interest rates, no other events) S&P would gain 7% in 2008
sorry can someone elaborate a bit more… it sounds pretty much the same! e.g if congress hadn’t unexpectedly increased spending, my recession prediction would have been accurate… this is supposed to “if-only”, why can’t it be “ceteris paribus”? - BN
Let me try to explain. If-only defense, would be used mostly after the fact. You would say, if only “something had or had not happened” what I predicted would have been correct. “ceteris paribus”, You would say - I think this would happen as long everything else remains the same.
ego defense = historical counterfactual = “if only”? thx
hala_madrid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ego defense = historical counterfactual = “if > only”? there are 5: o only-if o ceteris paribas o “it hasn’t happened yet” o almost right o single predictor - sticky