I wonder if sometimes debates are not just launched for a pretext to chat 
. In every domain you have endlessly debates.
I will take an other field to illustrate what I mean: In programing there has been a debate a long time ago between "ASM (Assembler langage) and C" then more recently between "C and VB" finally C killed ASM and VB has now huge number of programers ... because VB is just easier to grasp than C although C is much more powerful. So when something is more EASY it will attract more PEOPLE: it is the law of Evolution.
Indicators are more easy to grasp than pure market's action. Everybody (today not on old days) begins with indicators like many programmers today will begin with VB (or java which is a purified C so more easy to grasp also). Some will stop with VB because they don't see the advantage to program in C++. Why because many just cope with basic programming needs like database management and not high speed 3D game which would require C++. So the people who are trading on rather high scale can think that they don't need to understand market's action (many should even wonder what's that). In fact they just don't even imagine what it is because in their heads market's action is more or less distorted random walk. On the contrary people who trades at very low scales will find market's action necessary. But market's action understanding is also useful at higher scale but it is more difficult to believe in it since it is rather esoteric at first glance (I just didn't believe in it myself when I began to trade) and so indicators will be favored.
So the trend is perhaps towards large use of indicators that wouldn't mean that they are best, it is rather that they are more easy to grasp (and also to program in software packages by vendors). Then only a few "elite" traders will understand market's action like only a few assembler programers know how to program Windows in Assembler. Programming Windows in Assembler, for most newbie programmers would be considered as weird but in fact it is not so difficult and more you get a much more thorough understanding of how the windows systems works while people who program in MFC just don't sometimes know what happen underground. So people using indicators just ignore what happen underground, they don't feel the need to and they can even feel contempt with those "retarded" traders that don't want to use "modern" tools
. In every domain you have endlessly debates. I will take an other field to illustrate what I mean: In programing there has been a debate a long time ago between "ASM (Assembler langage) and C" then more recently between "C and VB" finally C killed ASM and VB has now huge number of programers ... because VB is just easier to grasp than C although C is much more powerful. So when something is more EASY it will attract more PEOPLE: it is the law of Evolution.
Indicators are more easy to grasp than pure market's action. Everybody (today not on old days) begins with indicators like many programmers today will begin with VB (or java which is a purified C so more easy to grasp also). Some will stop with VB because they don't see the advantage to program in C++. Why because many just cope with basic programming needs like database management and not high speed 3D game which would require C++. So the people who are trading on rather high scale can think that they don't need to understand market's action (many should even wonder what's that). In fact they just don't even imagine what it is because in their heads market's action is more or less distorted random walk. On the contrary people who trades at very low scales will find market's action necessary. But market's action understanding is also useful at higher scale but it is more difficult to believe in it since it is rather esoteric at first glance (I just didn't believe in it myself when I began to trade) and so indicators will be favored.
So the trend is perhaps towards large use of indicators that wouldn't mean that they are best, it is rather that they are more easy to grasp (and also to program in software packages by vendors). Then only a few "elite" traders will understand market's action like only a few assembler programers know how to program Windows in Assembler. Programming Windows in Assembler, for most newbie programmers would be considered as weird but in fact it is not so difficult and more you get a much more thorough understanding of how the windows systems works while people who program in MFC just don't sometimes know what happen underground. So people using indicators just ignore what happen underground, they don't feel the need to and they can even feel contempt with those "retarded" traders that don't want to use "modern" tools
