Almost everybody is now willing to admit this method of reckoning
probability when it is applied to dawns or to life insurance. It seems
quite natural to say that we know the sun will rise again because,
so far as we know, it always has risen; or to say that a baby has
a longer prospect of life than has a very old man because we have
observed that babies generally live, while very old men generally
die. But when we apply the same method to the calculations of certain
other things--the behavior of our penny, for instance--we shall meet,
strangely enough, with a lot of heretics. If a penny has fallen heads
for twenty times in succession, there are those who will say that the
chances of heads coming on the next throw are much worse than one to
one. “It is time for a change,” they will contend. And nothing can
keep them, if sportingly inclined, from wagering their money on tails.
But a mathematician will coldly bet on heads. _He knows that there is
something the matter with that penny!_
So come what are known as “runs of luck,”--a subject apparently remote
from that of free will, but not so remote as it seems. Runs of luck are
the result of unknown influences; for if the influences are known we do
not say “luck,” we use a harsher term. The oftener a thing has happened
before, the more likely it is to happen again. Some large force must
be at work, or there would not have been the run. This is such an
important rule that anyone who doubts it would do well to convince
himself of its validity. He will in that way not only improve his mind,
he will save money be he never so little of a “gambler” in the vicious
sense of the term. Losers are always playing the stock-market and the
world for “reactions” that “must come.” Winners always “go with the
trend.” They are vicious only when their prizes are evil.
“But what,” some will say, “of the change of luck which wipes out the
winnings? What of those larger cycles which bring the smaller cycles
to an end?” Just this. We know nothing of the larger cycles until we,
or somebody whose word we can trust, has begun to experience them.
Therefore our ignorance is complete in most cases, and we have no
chance against the larger cycles or rhythms at all--which is why
sensible people usually keep out of the stock-market. Doubtless there
is some larger cycle in cosmic events which will some day put out the
sun. But unless we have somehow been able to put our finger already
upon its pulse, we must ignore it in our calculations. We cannot bring
it to book. When any one cycle has kept up a faithful performance as
long as the sun has kept on rising, it must be a rather large cycle and
is pretty safe to depend on for our remaining days.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account