I have a lot to learn. My investment-paradigms are fairly fluid (e.g. no clear style bucket in terms of Deep value/GARP/Compounders). My only two rules are: (1) A stock represents a business interest, not a trading sardine. I am a business analyst first and foremost.(2) The world is too complex to make absolute statements most of the time. Relying on a few flexible paradigms with sound empirical grounding is far superior. Unfortunately, definitive sentences sound better. Take all of my assertions with a grain of salt. As an example: Reasoning by inversion is generally easier when optimizing, incentives beat culture most of the time, choose the doctor that doesn't look like a doctor, etc.