Being able to do without understanding is true intelligence.

I don’t know how humans came to the conclusion that you need truths to make mental models and frameworks. You need what works and not what is entirely made out of truth. If incorrect or false elements can get you to something that works then so be it. We want what works and not what is true. Results not truth. If all you want is +ve you can afford to have some -ve multipliers as long as it works out in end. Restricting yourself to only +ve multiplier would be taxing and outright dumb at times.

If you got some shtick that works and someone out there comes with a study that few or all components in your model are false then so be it. It works so who cares. Having truth as litmus test instead of result is an unnecessary and dumb burden to carry. Most probably makes you take less actions too. So fuck it. If it works dont ‘true’ it.

As a human you are an approximator. You are gifted with ability to decide in face of ambiguity. Ambiguity is a condition in which you can operate. So turning ambiguous to certain is not a prerequisite for human endeavors. Needing certainty or binary outcomes is a sign of lower intelligence. Computers which are inferior than us in many ways are such because they need the binary but as AI emerges, it is able to handle ambiguity. And thus computers are getting smarter. Evolution (the commendable designer) continues without certainty—random mutations occur without knowing in advance which will be useful, yet this process drives all progress in life. Working with certainty in financial markets will get you trouble. If you require absolute confidence before investing, you will never enter or SEC/SEBI will come knocking on your door for insider trading (the only source for certainty). Systems that require certainty are fragile; those that operate in uncertainty thrive. So the need for certainty is a cognitive hazard and a deterrent for work.

To translate the world into electrical signals in our head we lose so much info partly because of the limitations of our senses and brain and also shift in medium. To process that info, the structures and symbols we use to approximate “the world” we loaded in our head, which causes even more deviation from reality, we transmit this processed junk using symbols (words, diagrams) into the world and these symbols are not able to capture context which lead to us thinking this exact thing. Then those symbols are consumed by someone who will interpret it some other way because their context is different. A poem written wearing a silk robe in a warm room will not be the same for someone bleeding out in a rotting trench or someone studying it for their university course. Every cognitive process is loaded with info loss and approximations. And we dare demand truth and certainty.

Even if truth existed in some pure, objective form, we would never experience it fully. Every cognitive process is loaded with information loss and distortion.

1. Perception Loss – We do not see reality as it is. Our senses capture a filtered, compressed version of the world, removing vast amounts of data.
2. Cognitive Loss – The mind organizes perception into mental models, which are not direct representations but useful approximations.
3. Linguistic Loss – When we put thoughts into words, we undergo another layer of compression. Words are crude symbols, not reality itself.
4. Interpretation Loss – When someone hears or reads our words, they do not receive our actual thoughts. They receive their own interpretation, shaped by their context, biases, and experiences.

We are biological approximators, not truth-machines. The goal is not to seek some “pure” understanding of reality (which we are structurally incapable of achieving) but to find approximations that are effective.

History is full of examples where incomplete or even incorrect theories led to real-world progress:

• Newtonian physics is technically “wrong” under relativity, but it still put rockets into space.
• The placebo effect works, despite being based on illusion.
• Business strategies often rely on gut instincts and flawed data, yet they succeed.

The smartest people are not the ones who have perfect models of reality, but the ones who act decisively despite uncertainty. They work with functional distortions, update them as needed, and move forward. The need for perfect truth before action is a handicap—a self-imposed limitation.

So forget chasing absolute truth. Embrace ambiguity, make decisions in uncertainty, and trust what works. Because at the end of the day, results matter more than correctness.