6 ms·

That video of the crying manager is what made me quit Bridgewater. The craziest part was that the manager who ended up crying became the one who would teach les

That video of the crying manager is what made me quit Bridgewater. The craziest part was that the manager who ended up crying became the one who would teach lessons to new hires on how to "diagnose" other employees. Totally psychologically broken. Ray Dalio won't quit and he won't relinquish power. What you have instead now is this psychotic power grab at the top with three or more people competing for the crown. Any time someone gets close to knocking him out, they get demoted or fired. Principle #41: By and large, you will get what you deserve over time. The basis for any oppressive religion is #41. Those at the top deserved it, and, if you are at the bottom, it's because you haven't.

0xcde4c3db 10y ago
Principle #41 has a name in academia: the just-world hypothesis [1] (occasionally the just-world fallacy, largely from atheist and feminist sources). It has surprisingly widespread consequences and implications. Conservative politicians and pundits play on it when they tout "personal responsibility" in the face of systemic bias. Abusers use it to convince their victims that they "deserve" the abuse. Religiously devout people use it to minimize tragedies (not to mention crimes) as "part of God's plan", and so on. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  I often see people discussing the just world hypothesis and the awfulness of the people who believe it. But I very rarely see those same people even considering the possibility that it might be true. In the world of work, while exceptions exist, I've always seen a strong correlation between position and competence. (I haven't worked at bridgewater so I don't know if it's true there.) In the political/economic world, I see poor people refusing to engage in personal responsibility (i.e. having children out of wedlock, doing drugs, smoking, eating badly and not exercising, refusing to work) while the rich do the exact opposite. So I'll ask the question that I guess makes me an awful person too: why do we think the just world hypothesis is actually false?
  - hx87 10y ago
    Because there are far, far too many counterexamples for the hypothesis to be true in any useful sense.
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      Dalio's "by and large" indicates that he feels it's generally true, not universally true. I.e. a statistical trend, not a hard and fast rule. How do your uncited counterexamples show that a statistical trend is not true in any useful sense? Moreover, why isn't it reasonable to treat it as a hypothesis that is true in many specific contexts? Should we also discuss the personal awfulness of people who believe in normal distributions as a useful principle since not all data is normally distributed? "Racists and child molesters sometimes use normal distributions to model the world!"
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - GVIrish 10y ago
    > In the political/economic world, I see poor people refusing to engage in personal responsibility (i.e. having children out of wedlock, doing drugs, smoking, eating badly and not exercising, refusing to work) while the rich do the exact opposite. Yet there are plenty of poor people working two jobs and clipping coupons but never see their economic situation meaningfully improve. On the other side, someone born into wealth can be lazy, use drugs, and be a general screw up and still die wealthy. Plenty of rich people do drugs too but the chances of them going to jail for doing drugs are negligible compared to the chances of jail time for a poor person. Law enforcement targets poor neighborhoods far more heavily, wealthy people don't buy drugs off street corners, and wealthy people can pay for far better legal representation. Crime? White collar crime is rarely punished with jail time. Someone selling drugs on the street might get several years in jail, whereas someone who helps launder billions for drug cartels gets no jail time and their company only pays a fine. Unethical sociopathic behavior in politics and many parts of the business world is how some people get to the top. It's not that the most qualified or deserving person got what they deserved, it was that the most ruthless, self-promoting, and deceitful person took the spoils. The just world hypothesis is often what callous people use to justify why they have the riches and people lower on the totem pole don't. It's easy to point at poor people and say they're poor because they're lazy or irresponsible, but it's much harder to admit that someone succeeded because of either advantages they were born into, or outright immoral behavior.
toxik 10y ago
Jesus christ - this is a sect, not a business. I will forever cherish counterculture and dissent as the only way to make sure I don't wind up in sects. Jesus man I just want to give that poor woman a hug.
- johnny4000 10y ago
  Having willfully worked there in the past (I was not abducted Boko Haram style) I can tell you first hand they value evidence and reason (which includes both saying 'I agree' and dissenting), not sect like religiosity. The people in our prevalent culture today can't handle the truth, because their egos are in their way. Bridgewater in that specific way is much more counter culter.
jpatokal 10y ago
Whoah. I thought you were joking there, but that's actually Principle #41. Here's the whole tract: http://www.bwater.com/Uploads/FileManager/Principles/Bridgewater-Associates-Ray-Dalio-Principles.pdf http://www.bwater.com/Uploads/FileManager/Principles/Bridgew... Which reads like a particularly ego-centric self-help book, down to creepy formulae. "Pain + Reflection = Progress" or "1+1=3", anyone?
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  By comparing it to "1+1=3", you seem to be hinting that "pain + reflection = progress" is false. Is that actually your belief? Or do you believe it to be true but merely creepy? (Personally I consider it to be completely true. Most of my personal progress has come directly from pain, reflection, and then deliberate effort. Where does your personal progress come from?)
  - jpatokal 10y ago
    I'm OK with choosing to take on pain to grow. I do, however, find it creepy when a company's publicly stated values glorify pain.
  - wavefunction 10y ago
    Some pain is just pain, it's meaningless and even reflecting on it does you no good. So it's obviously not "true" but at best "sometimes true."
    - arethuza 10y ago
      For some reason this discussion reminds me of Yossarian's rant about pain and god in Catch 22.
  - dwpdwpdwpdwpdwp 10y ago
    If it is completely true, then surely "pain = progress - reflection" must also be completely true.

0xcde4c3db 10y ago

Principle #41 has a name in academia: the just-world hypothesis [1] (occasionally the just-world fallacy, largely from atheist and feminist sources). It has surprisingly widespread consequences and implications. Conservative politicians and pundits play on it when they tout "personal responsibility" in the face of systemic bias. Abusers use it to convince their victims that they "deserve" the abuse. Religiously devout people use it to minimize tragedies (not to mention crimes) as "part of God's plan", and so on. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis

yummyfajitas 10y ago
I often see people discussing the just world hypothesis and the awfulness of the people who believe it. But I very rarely see those same people even considering the possibility that it might be true. In the world of work, while exceptions exist, I've always seen a strong correlation between position and competence. (I haven't worked at bridgewater so I don't know if it's true there.) In the political/economic world, I see poor people refusing to engage in personal responsibility (i.e. having children out of wedlock, doing drugs, smoking, eating badly and not exercising, refusing to work) while the rich do the exact opposite. So I'll ask the question that I guess makes me an awful person too: why do we think the just world hypothesis is actually false?
- hx87 10y ago
  Because there are far, far too many counterexamples for the hypothesis to be true in any useful sense.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    Dalio's "by and large" indicates that he feels it's generally true, not universally true. I.e. a statistical trend, not a hard and fast rule. How do your uncited counterexamples show that a statistical trend is not true in any useful sense? Moreover, why isn't it reasonable to treat it as a hypothesis that is true in many specific contexts? Should we also discuss the personal awfulness of people who believe in normal distributions as a useful principle since not all data is normally distributed? "Racists and child molesters sometimes use normal distributions to model the world!"
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- GVIrish 10y ago
  > In the political/economic world, I see poor people refusing to engage in personal responsibility (i.e. having children out of wedlock, doing drugs, smoking, eating badly and not exercising, refusing to work) while the rich do the exact opposite. Yet there are plenty of poor people working two jobs and clipping coupons but never see their economic situation meaningfully improve. On the other side, someone born into wealth can be lazy, use drugs, and be a general screw up and still die wealthy. Plenty of rich people do drugs too but the chances of them going to jail for doing drugs are negligible compared to the chances of jail time for a poor person. Law enforcement targets poor neighborhoods far more heavily, wealthy people don't buy drugs off street corners, and wealthy people can pay for far better legal representation. Crime? White collar crime is rarely punished with jail time. Someone selling drugs on the street might get several years in jail, whereas someone who helps launder billions for drug cartels gets no jail time and their company only pays a fine. Unethical sociopathic behavior in politics and many parts of the business world is how some people get to the top. It's not that the most qualified or deserving person got what they deserved, it was that the most ruthless, self-promoting, and deceitful person took the spoils. The just world hypothesis is often what callous people use to justify why they have the riches and people lower on the totem pole don't. It's easy to point at poor people and say they're poor because they're lazy or irresponsible, but it's much harder to admit that someone succeeded because of either advantages they were born into, or outright immoral behavior.

toxik 10y ago

Jesus christ - this is a sect, not a business. I will forever cherish counterculture and dissent as the only way to make sure I don't wind up in sects. Jesus man I just want to give that poor woman a hug.

johnny4000 10y ago
Having willfully worked there in the past (I was not abducted Boko Haram style) I can tell you first hand they value evidence and reason (which includes both saying 'I agree' and dissenting), not sect like religiosity. The people in our prevalent culture today can't handle the truth, because their egos are in their way. Bridgewater in that specific way is much more counter culter.

jpatokal 10y ago

Whoah. I thought you were joking there, but that's actually Principle #41. Here's the whole tract: http://www.bwater.com/Uploads/FileManager/Principles/Bridgewater-Associates-Ray-Dalio-Principles.pdf http://www.bwater.com/Uploads/FileManager/Principles/Bridgew... Which reads like a particularly ego-centric self-help book, down to creepy formulae. "Pain + Reflection = Progress" or "1+1=3", anyone?

yummyfajitas 10y ago
By comparing it to "1+1=3", you seem to be hinting that "pain + reflection = progress" is false. Is that actually your belief? Or do you believe it to be true but merely creepy? (Personally I consider it to be completely true. Most of my personal progress has come directly from pain, reflection, and then deliberate effort. Where does your personal progress come from?)
- jpatokal 10y ago
  I'm OK with choosing to take on pain to grow. I do, however, find it creepy when a company's publicly stated values glorify pain.
- wavefunction 10y ago
  Some pain is just pain, it's meaningless and even reflecting on it does you no good. So it's obviously not "true" but at best "sometimes true."
  - arethuza 10y ago
    For some reason this discussion reminds me of Yossarian's rant about pain and god in Catch 22.
- dwpdwpdwpdwpdwp 10y ago
  If it is completely true, then surely "pain = progress - reflection" must also be completely true.