Two sides on an argument

The political debate in Washington is getting more strident and the respective parties are getting more entrenched in their positions. The possibility of a compromise is reduced when both parties define compromise as an event where the other side gives in completely.

This is the situation that we are faced with currently. The only way out is when both sides are able to look at the situation from the others point of view or when both sides are able to put themselves in the others shoes or when both sides can look at two sides of the argument. I can keep writing metaphors but I guess you have got the point already!

But then looking at two sides of an argument is not always a good idea. Anybody who introspects too deeply is unlikely to actually get anything done. I mean look at a simple question like should I eat a tasty pizza for lunch? If I start evaluating this I can come up with arguments for YES like 1] Pizza is tasty 2] Is something to look forward to 3] Will put me in a better frame of mind. Or arguments for NO like 1] Will add to my already substantial weight 2] Will make me sleepy for the rest of the afternoon 3] Will add to my already high cholestrol levels. When even a decision to eat pizza is impossible to take by looking at both sides of situation, how can more important decisions be made by evaluating the situation more deeply? In fact the more one looks at a situation from different perspectives the more unlikely one is likely to come to any conclusion.

I have a feeling that most decisions are taken more instinctively or subconciously and we only rationalise it later to ourselves with some arguments in favor of the decision. While most often in life, one can get away with such post facto rationalisation, trading in that manner is likely to decimate me. So I stick to more mundane rule based trading, where decisions are out of my hands

Current Position: STT Short LTT Long 

Probable Trades  STT: cut short and go long > 5711.10

LTT: Cut long and go short < 5502