Reddit reviews Faith and Criticism: The Sarum Lectures 1992

not someone who replied, and I understand sunk cost. however, I believe the concept of sunk cost glosses over the complexity of trading. a book on a completely different topic (theology) has a pretty good treatment of how intellectual inquiry cannot in practice drift seamlessly from belief to belief as available evidence changes. I think this is even more true in trading, where one's emotions are likely to play havoc with reason.

A description of the book from an amazon reviewer:

> [Mitchell] argues that the model generally associated with W.K. Clifford of being completely noncommittal in one's evaluation of beliefs and exactly proportioning one's belief to the available evidence is misguided for at least two reasons: 1) in our condition as fragile, limited cognitive agents we are often lured by apparent counter-evidence which is not actually cogent to abandon our commitment, and this would be a mistake because 2) it is only through passionate commitment even in the face of strong criticism that the full range, depth and implications of the belief-system can be articulated. It may be that only a partial modification of the system is required rather than abandoning it altogether, or that criticism can help clarify the issues involved without, again, necessitating its complete abandonment. This occurs even in natural science, supposedly the cluster of disciplines where Clifford's model might be most expected to apply; time and time again great scientists have clung passionately to their theories even in the face of the harshest criticism and it was only due to their tenacity that they were finally vindicated when the technical apparatus for settling the issue one way or another became sufficiently advanced (Even Charles Darwin acknowledged in the "Origin of Species" that the difficulties for his theory seemed 'insurmountable', but he insisted that these difficulties were merely apparent, and so they were).