In reality, we are very risk averse. We’d rather keep everything the same, even if it means we can get a good deal on a new pair of pants, or a new TV, or a new pair of shoes, or a new refrigerator, or a new car, or a new job, or a new hobby, or a new relationship, or a new home.
This is because we like order. We like being able to know where our resources will go so we can make smart decisions about how to allocate them. In everyday life, this usually means we are willing to take extra chances with our resources (like going for an extra pair of wheels on our car) so as to avoid making a mistake that could cost us our resources.
This is a kind of non-systematic risk. We are less likely to take extra risks with our resources if we are not expecting them to be available tomorrow, because we are often unaware of how to allocate them. This is a sort of non-systematic risk because we are less likely to take extra chances if we don’t expect them to be available, so we might not even take them.
This is why it is so dangerous to not have a plan for how to allocate resources. If we do not have a plan for how to allocate resources then we might not make the best decision, we might make the decision that just doesn’t work out. That is why risk is always risk, because we are always prone to making mistakes.
I like that there is a way to allocate resources that is non-systematic. It is hard enough to say “Oh man, I have a big budget” without the implication that we are somehow not intelligent, and that we might somehow not use that big budget to the best advantage. When we are given a list of options, we can use that information to determine which one is best suited for our circumstances.
The risk equation is a non-systematic one because it doesn’t account for anything about an individual’s life. It’s all about the choices you make. It’s a system that is not systematic because the factors that affect the risk are not the same for everyone. If you do not have the same amount of money or the same amount of experience, then your risk is greater because you are not getting as many options.
But the point is that all the factors should be factored into the equation. What I mean by that is that if you are a person who is afraid of spiders, then there is no way you should be going up to the top of a building during an invasion and doing absolutely nothing. You are way too afraid of spiders. If you are a person who is afraid of heights, it makes sense to not jump off a building when you are afraid of heights.
And no, jumping off a building is not the same as being hit by a spider. It’s like when you are on a date and you feel like the person you are with is going to get up and leave, but then they do, and you still end up having sex with them. It doesn’t mean that you are actually on a date. It just means that you are on a date.
The good news is that there is no guarantee that something like this wont happen. The bad news is that your risk tolerance seems to be lower than the average person’s. You are too scared of spiders to jump off a building, and spiders are more intimidating than any other type of fear. But that doesn’t mean you won’t be hit by a spider. You might not even know that you saw one.
The thing about spiders in particular is that they are so often associated with death. So you should be on the watch for them. But you also need to be on the watch for the good stuff. That means you should be on the watch for your partner. The best thing you can do is to make it a goal to try to have a date with your partner on your own. To make it a goal to try to see each other in new ways.
