The bull hits from below to above: the object is rising. A "bullish" market is pulled upwards.
The bear hits from above to below: the object is falling. A "bearish" market is pushed downwards.
The bear hits from above to below: the object is falling. A "bearish" market is pushed downwards.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-origins-of...
> The bear came first. Etymologists point to a proverb warning that it is not wise "to sell the bear's skin before one has caught the bear." By the eighteenth century, the term bearskin was being used in the phrase "to sell (or buy) the bearskin" and in the name "bearskin jobber," referring to one selling the "bearskin." Bearskin was quickly shortened to bear, which was applied to stock that was being sold by a speculator and the speculator selling stock.
...
> At about the same time, another animal symbol made its appearance in the marketplace. The term bull originally meant a speculative purchase in the expectation that stock prices would rise; the term was later applied to the person making such purchases. The animal seems to have been chosen as a fitting alter ego to the bear. Thus poet Alexander Pope wrote in 1720:
> > Come fill the South Sea goblet full;
> > The gods shall of our stock take care:
> > Europa pleased accepts the Bull,
> > And Jove with joy puts off the Bear.
> This eighteenth-century animal imagery caught on, and bears and bulls have been in the stock market ever since.
I'm not really satisfied with the bull explanation either, as it sounds a bit tauotological, but whatever.
In short,
> all those senses ("horn thrust and paw slam", "domesticated vs savage") are backformations. We adopted them because they made sense.
But now, about
> ridiculous folklore etymology someone made up (no offense, and apparently my guess is not right either)
It does not work that way. An etymology as an history of a term will produce a chronicle, not yet a meaning: in 1709 somebody started to use "bearskin" out of the proverb, etc. But there is not just that: there is the meaning of terms that we recognize during that development - "horn thrust and paw slam", "domesticated vs savage", as I wrote nearby. So, what I wrote in the original is the meaning that came after the origin - what is intended (or part of what is intended). In fact, "bear" (in market speculation) comes from "bearskin", but where did they take the "bull" from (image that was construed to have a bear as a counterpart)? There you have to reason about the terms and construct a working image.
There is no need to call it "ridiculous": it is normal sense attribution for jargon creation.
Edit:
in fact, for a study of the origin you can also consult Investopedia, "Where Did the Bull and Bear Market Get Their Names?", at https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/bull-bear-market-na...
where you will find foremostly the images of their ways of attack. Then the origin, the "bearskin jobber", and the need to have a counterpart. Then it noted, importantly, that bets on bull and bear fights were very popular in the past centuries - which can be another origin of using those animals for a bet.
I’m not sure I understand why using bear/bull terms makes one full of themselves?
2) People in the software industry, also extremely full of themselves.
The real origin of the terms is from the early 1700: "seller of the bear skin before the bear is caught" - old proverb - was called the player that tries to deliver goods after their price has fallen (so a seller in advance). In 1709 the term was in fact 'bearskin'.
Ten years later the "bull" was introduced as a counterpart - this time probably with relation to the images.