The Science of Success Podcast

  • Get STARTED
  • The Podcast
    • The Best Of
    • SHOW NOTES
    • EPISODE LIST
    • BLOG
  • ABOUT US
    • Our Mission
    • Team
    • Our Partners
    • CONTACT
  • Evidence-Based Growth
  • Rate & Review
  • BOOKSHELF
  • Shop
  • Search

“The Most Innovative Experimental Psychologist In The World Today” on Luck, Deception, and Success - Dr. Richard Wiseman

January 25, 2018 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we explore luck. Does luck exist? Is there a science of luck? What does the research reveal about lucky people and unlucky people? Is it possible to manufacture your own luck? We speak with research psychologist Dr. Richard Wiseman and learn the truth about luck and how you just might able to create a bit more in your own life.

Dr. Richard Wiseman has been described by The Scientific American as “The most interesting and innovative experimental psychologist in the world today” and his books have sold over 3 million copies worldwide. Richard started his career as a working magician and now holds Britain’s only Professorship in the Public Understanding of Psychology. His work has been featured across the globe and he has delivered keynotes to The Royal Society, The Swiss Economic Forum, Google, and more.

  • How Richard went from being a performance magician to being deeply interested in human psychology

  • How studying "the psychology of deception” taught Dr. Wiseman to subtly influence human perception and behavior

  • Most people think they are good lie detectors, but they are in fact not - they are no better than chance

  • When you focus on reading only a transcript - average people go up to 60-70% effectiveness in detecting lies

  • People prefer to lie with the spoken word rather than with written word

  • Ask people “can you email that to me” to catch them in a lie

  • Does luck exist?

  • What research reveals the difference between lucky and unlucky people

  • For the most part, people are CREATING THEIR OWN LUCK by the way they are thinking and acting

  • The research supports, with enormous consistency, that you can create luck

  • The differences between lucky and unlucky people

  • The “newspaper experiment” and how it demonstrates the difference between being lucky and unlucky

  • How your “attentional spotlight” filters your perception and reality - causing you to miss basic opportunities - this is what the “unlucky” often do to themselves

  • Then, Dr. Wiseman taught subjects in experiments to “think like a lucky person” and these simple exercises caused the “unlucky” to be more lucky

  • Keep a “luck diary” - the most positive thing / positive thought that happens in a day - will rapidly reorient you towards being more “lucky”

  • The lucky tended to be more intuitive, risk seeking, and resilient

  • Generating “negative counterfactuals” and “finding the silver lining” can help you generate more luck

  • You are creating your own good and bad luck by what you are thinking and feeling

  • What happens if you don’t think you can train your mind to be more positive?

  • Try these “luck producing strategies” for 1 month and you will be luckier in your life

  • How people get stuck in an identity of being “unlucky” can sometimes trap you in a certain behavior pattern

  • Creating and cultivating flexibility in your life - taking a different route to work, changing your conversational style - enables you to capture luck in your life

  • Lucky people are “team players” and constantly look for win-wins - trying to help other people become successful and engaging and talking with other people constantly

  • Buying lottery tickets all day by exploring opportunities and relationships in an open way is how you can “create luck” in your life

  • The biggest myths of self help - and what evidence actually says about them

  • The danger of visualization - and why it doesn’t actually work - in fact “visualization is a terrible idea”

  • Visualizing endpoint threatens your motivation and ability to actually achieve those results, visualizing process is much more effective

  • Brainstorming reduces creativity by 20% in a group setting for 2 reasons

  • Social Loafing

    1. Group gets dominated by people who may or may not be the most creative

  • The far more effective brainstorming strategy is to brainstorm on your own - then everyone shows up to a meeting with their own perspective

  • The Harvard Motivational Study is a “complete work of fiction” - it’s never been conducted

  • Asking for evidence is essential - don’t believe something because it sounds plausible and it’s easy

  • The power of writing your own eulogy and how it can shed light on your true goals

  • The one technique you can use to shed light on your true intentions and goals for life

  • Terror management theory - how we respond to the things that scare us

  • Life is short - live the best life possible right now

  • The “As If” Principle

  • You have NO IDEA how you feel until you observe yourself

  • How the “As If” principle can help imapct phobias, anxiety, and depression

  • Ask yourself “how do I behave when I’m happy” - DO ALL THOSE THINGS and you will feel happier

  • The effects happen within 30-40 seconds

  • How do you generate the will power and motivation to act “as if”

  • I’m not nervous “I’m acting as-if I’m excited” - you can use labeling as a tool to act “as-if”

  • The power of the pre-mortem and finding out the risks, downsides, and problems of any project before you get started

iTunes Button.png
Stitcher Button.png
Android Button.png
YouTube.png

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SkillShare.png

This weeks episode is brought to you by our partners at Skillshare!

For a limited time, Skillshare is offering our listeners THREE MONTHS OF UNLIMITED CLASSES for only $0.99! That's UNLIMITED classes for three months for only $0.99. Go to www.skillshare.com/success99 to redeem this incredible offer NOW!

Skillshare is an online learning platform with over 18,000 classes in design, business, technology, and more. Whether you’re trying to deepen your professional skill-set, start a side hustle, or just explore something new, Skillshare will keep you learning in 2018 and beyond.

Again, Skillshare is offering our listeners the incredible deal of three whole months of UNLIMITED classes for only $0.99 so get out there and start learning at www.skillshare.com/success99

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] 59 Seconds: Change Your Life in Under a Minute by Richard Wiseman

  • [Book] The Luck Factor by Richard Wiseman

  • [Book] The As If Principle: The Radically New Approach to Changing Your Life by Richard Wiseman

  • [Youtube Channel] Quirkology

  • [Personal Site] Richard Wiseman

Episode Transcript


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success introducing your host, Matt Bodnar.

[0:00:11.9] MB: Welcome to the Science of Success, the number one evidence-based growth podcast on the Internet with more than a million downloads and listeners in over 100 countries.

In this episode we explore luck. Does luck exist? Is there a science behind luck? What does the research reveal about lucky people and unlucky people? Is it possible to manufacture your own luck? We speak with research psychologist, Dr. Richard Wiseman, and learn the truth about luck and how you just might be able to create a little bit more in your own life. 

I'm going to give you three reasons why you should join our email list today by going to successpodcast.com and signing up right on the homepage. There's some amazing stuff that's only available to our email subscribers, so be sure to sign up. 

First, you're going to get awesome free guide that we create based on listener demand, including our most popular guide; How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get that completely for free along with another surprise bonus guide by signing up and join the email list today. 

Next, you’re going to get a curated curating weekly email from us every single week called Mindset Monday, short, simple, actionable science-based advice that you can implement into your life. Listeners have been loving this email. Next, you’re going to get listener exclusive content and a chance to shape the show, vote on guests, change our intro music, even submit your own questions to upcoming guests. So be sure to stay on the list. Only people on the email list have access to these opportunities. You can sign up by going to successpodcast.com signing up right on the homepage, or if you’re on the go, if you’re out and about, driving around, whatever else, you can text the word “smarter”, that S-M-A-R-T-E-R to the number 44222. 

In our previous episode, we discussed the habits of high achievers, the motivation myth, the deep into the habits, routines and strategies you can use to achieve more in less time, talk about the balance between hustle and hard work versus recovery and much more with our guest, Jeff Haden. 

If you want to get the habit and strategies the top performers use to achieve results in the real-world, listen to that interview. 

Now, without further ado, here's Dr. Richard Wiseman. I did want to give you a heads up. He is in England, so we had a little bit of a choppy connection. Nothing too bad, but I just wanted to let you know before the interview starts. 

Here we go. 

[0:02:28.7] MB: Today, we have another awesome guest on the show, Dr. Richard Wiseman. Richard has been described by the Scientific American as the most interesting and innovative experimental psychologist in the world today. His books have sold over 3 million copies. He began his career working as a magician and now holds Britain's only professorship the in public understanding of psychology. His work is been featured across the globe and he’s delivered keynotes to the Royal Society, the Swiss Economic Forum, Google and more. 

Richard, welcome to the Science of Success. 

[0:03:00.6] RW: Pleasure to be here. Thank you very much. 

[0:03:02.6] MB: We’re very excited to have you on today. I love to start out. I definitely want to dig into a number of things you've written about and spoken about. To start out though, your background and the journey of how you kind of became fascinated with all these different subjects is fascinating. So I love to begin with that, hear a little bit about how you began and sort of where that journey took you. 

[0:03:23.5] RW: I guess I began with my passion in life, which was magic and performing magic. So when I was surrounded about 8 years old, I sold my first magic trick, really got into it and went to the public library and started reading a lot about magic. I was professional before in my early teens, and then started to look more at the psychology of magic, because if you're going to be a good magician, you need to understand how your audience thinks and feels. It’s a pretty order, because you're standing in front of a group of strangers and you need to do psychology experiments about magic tricks myself night after night and fool every single person in the room. 

You can't have a good night where you just fool 80% of people. You do have to understand how people's minds work, where their attention is, how they’re perceiving what’s in front of them, how they’re remembering the performance afterwards, particularly when they discuss it with their friends. I just became interested in that very practical, applied aspect of psychology and essentially became so interested in it that I studied as an experimental psychologist first at University College London, which perhaps not surprisingly is in London. 

At the end of that, I was looking for an interesting Ph.D. and by chance I saw a poster up on the wall. These were the days before email. So we used to communicate with posters. There was a poster up on the wall saying that there was a professor at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, and he was interested in psychology of deception and was looking for a candidate to explore that topic with him. 

I applied to the University of Edinburgh, was accepted on that course and spent four years looking at deception, and then at the end of that, I came back down to the south of the U.K., at the University of Hertfordshire and started to work on social psychology and on the psychology of self-development, and that's where I’ve been ever since. I've only really have one proper job, which has been at the university and that's been for 20 something years now. But that is basically the kind of line through in terms of my career. 

[0:05:25.4] MB: So the psychology of deception sounds fascinating. Tell me a little bit of what were kind of some of the fundamental conclusions or ideas that you uncovered when you were working on that?

[0:05:36.0] RW: Partly, again, was looking at the psychology of magic. Magicians need to convince you of a certain and that narrative has something impossible in it, that somebody levitates or appears or disappears or whatever it is. But behind that narrative, you have the real narrative, the method some magicians like to call it the trap doors or the mirrors, and we are looking at ways in which magicians encourage you to think one sets of things and not all ask certain questions. 

If you take a very — I don’t know, a very kind of simple trick where you ask people to think for a number between 1 and 10 and the magician might predict that people are going to say number 7, that’s to do with the fact if that trick fools you. It’s to do with the fact that you don’t realize that seven is the most frequently chosen number and so. They hide that a little bit away from you. That was one part of it. 

The other part was looking at the psychology of lying, and particularly weather people, when they lie, give off more information, give off more tales if you like using their body language or using the words they say. We carried out quite a well-known experiment on the British media where we had a very well-known political commentator go on to a television program, and I interviewed him twice, once about his favorite film and he told me he loved Gone With the Wind, and then asked him a second time about his favorite film, and he told me he'd love Some Like it Hot, because one of them was a complete lie. Yes, he hated one of those two films. 

We have the public vote on which they thought was the lie, and in line with all of the experimental work into lying, they were about 50-50. No better than charms. Most people think they could lie detectors, but they really not. When we took just the soundtrack of those two interviews and put them on the radio or just to publish the transcripts in the national newspaper, people's lie detecting abilities went up into the 60%, 70%, and the reason for that is that when we lie, it’s very easy to control our body language. Whether we gesture or smile [inaudible 0:07:39.9]. It’s much harder to control the words we say and how we say them. If you shift people's attention on to those attributes, they become much better lie detectors, and that was all parts of that deception work as well. 

[0:07:52.9] MB: That's fascinating. So an average person will be essentially no better than 50-50 chance of detecting a liar if they're looking at a video of someone, but if you take them to the transcript, you said it was up to 60 %to 70%?

[0:08:06.2] RW: Absolutely. It’s one, the simplest of fixes. If you're thinking someone is going to lie to you, actually just guessing them on the phone is much better than interviewing them or speaking to them face-to-face. In fact, actually I returned that. I know we’ll probably talk about 59 Seconds later on, but I returned that topic in 59 Seconds, which is my book about these sorts of things. The other aspect of lie detection is that people don't want to commit the lie to paper, to something that whether you can look back and go, “hold on a second. You told me that at that point.” They rather like the idea of it being a spoken lie, because then can say, “You’ve misremembered what I said.” 

In 59 Seconds, I was talking about some of the research, which if you want to find out whether someone’s lying to you, the magic words to use are, “Can you email that to me?” If they are lying, that email will never arrive, or when it does arrive, it's somewhat different than what they just told you face-to-face. I became just interested in these simple winds, these things, which evidence-base, that can have a very big impact. 

[0:09:13.5] MB: That’s fascinating. I love that symbols sort of practical strategy of just asking some to email you and then sort of gauging whether that's different from what they communicated to you. 

I’d love to transition, because there're so many things I want to talk about in this interview. Your work on luck is one of the most fascinating things that I think you've done. I’d love to kind of start out with many people think of luck, they think that it's kind of randomness of chance or sort of arbitrary. From your perspective and from the work in the research that you’ve done, what is it mean to be lucky and does luck exist?

[0:09:48.3] RW: That work dates back a long way. It dates back to the 1990s, actually, and at that time — And this was before, really, the kind of evidence-based self-help movement was around. It was a little bit before even what’s called positive psychology was around. I was talking to people about key moments in their lives how they ended up in certain relationships and certain careers and they would talk about these lucky and unlucky moments. They would talk about themselves being a lucky or unlucky person. 

At that point in time, really, people, psychologists, had dismissed the concept of luck. They had said, “Look. It’s just random. It's like winning or losing a lottery. There’s no science to be had here,” or these people are kidding themselves. They’re not really lucky. 

I embarked on this research project, which was gathering together about a thousand people who consider themselves exceptionally lucky and unlucky, and then presenting them with various tasks and seeing how they responded. What we saw even very early on in that research within probably the first six months, it was a four-year project, but within the first six months, we saw very big difference emerging between the lucky and the unlucky people. So we came to the conclusion towards the end of that project that for the most part, it’s not true of every aspect of your life, but for the most part, people are creating their own luck by the way they were thinking and the way they're behaving. 

They didn't realize that it didn't look like that to them, that it will be like a magic trick. To them it looked a magical thing that was just happening that they were either destined to do well in life or fated to do badly, but we could see unconsciously that we’re using certain tricks to accomplish that, and that then formed the basis of my very first book, which was the luck factor, which again was the first kind of evidence-based take on self-help where we were saying to people. “Look. Don't just listen to her self-help guru. Ask for the evidence. We've done the experiments. We can tell you what we found, and here are some exercises that hopefully will make you luckier in life.”

[0:11:52.0] MB: I want to dig in to how to create or manufacture your own luck, but before we do, I'm really curious if you could share maybe an example or two or a story from some of the research you did around luck, because I know there's some really kind of interesting and compelling examples. 

[0:12:07.9] RW: We had a lot of them, and there's enormous consistency. I think the lucky people, always in the right place at the right time, lots of opportunities, they always fall on their feet and so on. In terms of the unluckiest people, we had one woman who had five car accidents in one 50-mile journey, which she put down to her jinxed green car, and then one day she came to the University and watched her trying to park the car, and we realized there were a few other factors in there. She’s also unlucky in love, so she signed up with a dating agency and first date came off his motorbike and broke his leg. The replacement day, walked into a glass door and broke his nose and eventually when she found someone to marry, the church they're going to get married in was burned down one day before the wedding, and that was how her whole life had gone. That was very typical of the unlucky people. Everything I touch was an absolute disaster. 

Then on the flip side, you have these lucky people who wanted to start with a new kind of business venture and went to a party and met somebody there by chance and that person was exactly the person they needed in order to catapult themselves forward, and they became millionaires and so on. So very big differences between the two groups. 

[0:13:24.4] MB: And how can somebody, for example, the woman who was consistently unlucky, how could she sort of transition or become someone who is lucky, and what were some of the differences between her and a lucky person?

[0:13:37.2] RW: Well, if we start with the differences, one was very interesting, almost perceptual different actually in terms of how they were seeing the world, and this was the form, the basis for an experiment we did. This then became quite well-known in terms of having people look at the newspaper. 

We asked people to come into the lab to flick through a newspaper and just count the number of photographs in the newspaper. It's a fairly dull thing to do. What we didn't tell them is there were two large opportunities placed in the newspaper. One was a half-page advert with massive type that said, “Stop counting. There are 42 photographs in this newspaper,” and the other was another half page advert that said, “Say, you’ve seen, tell the experiment you’ve seen, and win,” whatever it was, 100 pounds or something. 

What was fascinating was the lucky people tended to spot those opportunities, and so they would stop and go, “My goodness! That's great. I don’t need to count all the photographs, or could I have my prize now?” The unlucky people literally turned the page and didn't see them, and that's to do with this notion of attentional spotlight, that when we look at the world, we’re not seeing everything that's in front of us. We’re seeing a small part of it, where we place that active attention. When you become worried and anxious and concerned, as the unlucky people were, that becomes very small. You become very focused, and in doing so, you don't see something if you don't expect to see it. 

The lucky people were far more relaxed and far more cheerful, had a large attentional spotlight, and so more likely to see opportunities they don’t expect and also act on them. That was the type of study we’re doing in order to try and tease really what was happening, why one group would say, “My goodness! I get all these opportunities,” and another group would say, “I never get a break.”

[0:15:35.8] MB: I love the newspaper experiment. That’s one of my favorite examples, and I’m so glad you shared it, and it just demonstrates really clearly that it's not necessarily sort of fate and random chance that's causing people to be lucky or unlucky. Obviously, there is a factor of that, but in many ways you can kind of create your own luck.

[0:15:56.0] RW: Absolutely. That was the premises of the research. Then what we did was to go on and test that. So hold on a second. If we take a group of people who are not particularly lucky or unlucky and we get them to think and behave like a lucky person, does that increase their luck? That data forms the basis, the luck factor book, and we found very simple exercises. The simplest one, but one of the most popular and which is now a well-known exercise, but at the time it wasn't, which is just getting people to keep a lucky diary and at the end of each day writing down the most positive thing, positive thought that they’ve had during that day, or one negative event that used to happen is no longer happening, or some sense of gratitude they have, their friends, or family or health or job or whatever. That starts to reorient people quite quickly. 

So one of the issues with focusing is that if you are an unlucky personal or think you are, you literally do not see the good things in your life until you start to carry out that exercise. It’s a very, very simple intervention found, well it’s the simplest of interventions that had the most powerful effects, but you could see dramatically over the course of a month or two people becoming more positive, becoming luckier because of those interventions. 

[0:17:12.7] MB: I’d love to dig in to a few of the other kind of tactics and strategies that you talked about that people can use to create their own luck.

[0:17:20.2] RW: There are lots of them. We looked at intuition. Lucky people tended to be a little bit more intuitive than unlucky people. They tended to be risk-takers without being reckless. They also tended when bad things happen to be very resilient. So whereas the unlucky people would always generate what are called positive counterfactual, that is when a bad event happened, they always imagined how it could've been much, much better. 

If they — I don’t know, fallen on the stairs, broke their leg. They said, “Well, I could have fallen down the stairs and not broken my leg, and therefore this is a terrible, terrible outcome.” What lucky people do naturally is imagine they could've been [inaudible 0:17:59.4], and so they’d go, “Well, I could've fallen down the stairs and broke both of my legs,” for example. That automatic generating of an negative counterfactuals really helps people with resilience as does finding the silver lining, that no matter how bad the event, there will be something good that has come from it. Again, lucky people very naturally do that. Unlucky people, it's very, very hard for them until the exercise is pointed out to them to find that the positive in what seems like a negative event. 

All these things are very simple, but I think we're the first people to really try and put numbers to the them, to kind of go, “Okay. Let's test this. Let’s find out what works and what doesn't work.”

[0:18:43.3] MB: I just wanted to confirm again for people listening that your research came to the fundamental conclusion that people who are and think of themselves as unlucky can learn these basic behaviors and literally sort of manufacture or create their own luck and become a luckier person just by implementing a few of these behaviors. 

[0:19:04.0] RW: That’s right. It doesn't feel like that at the time. It feels like, as I say, something magical or supernatural is happening, but it is deeply psychological. It's not true of everything. I mean, there are some events in your life that really are chance and nothing to do with you, but for the most part you’re creating your own good and bad luck by the way you're thinking and feeling. More importantly, change how you think and feel and you can increase the luck you experience, and that was the very radical notion which underlie the luck factor book. 

When that came out, it sold right across the world and became this kind of big bestseller, which was a lovely thing to see, that we could take our research and give it not only a national, but an international platform for people.

[0:19:43.6] MB: And what would you say to somebody who’s listening and sort of things to themselves, “Yeah, that sounds great, but that’s not work for me, or it's not going to happen when I do it, or I can't train my mind to see the positive in things.”

[0:19:58.7] RW: I guess — We heard that a lot from the unlucky people, and what we found was it was the simplest of interventions that have the big effects. The problem with some of these more [inaudible 0:20:09.4] interventions is that people get confused or they don’t have the willpower to keep going or they’re not quite certain what they should do. Everything is very simple. We know it works with the vast majority of people. I have to say, [inaudible 0:20:23.8]. There’s around about 20% of people that rather enjoy being unlucky, and what I mean by that is their self-identity is bound up with that. They’re the person that goes to parties and knocks over glasses and, “Oh my goodness! That's clumsy me. Everything I do, absolutely terrible,” and at some level they’re enjoying that and at some level are deeply afraid to move away from that identity, and those folks are very hard to reach, actually. But for the vast majority of people, actually these things do work, but you do need to do it. If you give up before you stopped, clearly it's not going to have much of an impact. You need to do these things. The person says, “Well, they’ll work or won’t work,” I would say come back after a month of doing them and then tell me that. If you tell it to me right now, I'm going be a bit skeptical, because you’re giving up before you started.

[0:21:16.8] MB: So you mentioned the luck diary. We talked a little bit about sort of find the silver linings. What are some of the other really simple strategies that people can implement?

[0:21:26.6] RW: Part of it was about flexibility, that even when the unlucky people saw an opportunity, they were very scared to move forward, because they were in a rut and they rather like routine even though it wasn’t a successful routine. Getting people to be more flexible, getting people to try things they haven't tried before, going to work or college with a different route, listening to whatever it is, radio that you don't normally listen to, trying different types of food, altering your conversational style. If you’re [inaudible 0:21:57.3] spending a bit more time, vice versa if your introverts, going two hours without saying the word I. All of these things give you a sense of flexibility, and that means that when an opportunity comes along, you're far more likely to make the most of that opportunity rather than go, “No. I'm not that sort of person. I am not a sort of person who’s flexible and changes.” 

[0:22:19.2] MB: Even these simple sort of daily interventions, things like taking a different route to work, changing the conversational sort of strategies or styles that you’re using, maybe going for a walk randomly or to a different place that you don’t typically do. All of these create sort of the behavior or the sort of competency of flexibility, which then enables you to kind of capture “luck” when it sort of falls into your lap. 

[0:22:45.1] RW: That's pretty much it. It puts you into the mindsets in that instance of somebody who’s flexible, who changes. The one thing we know about life is it’s not predictable. The strategies that worked last week may not work so well next week. So you need to be able to change and alter the sort of person you are., and lucky people were like that. They were very open to an uncertain future they thought they’d be able to cope, but they were very open to an uncertain future, where the unlucky people really like the idea of a plan. Even if that plan didn't work out, they would still keep on repeating it, because at least it have some certainty to. 

Also, lucky people tended to be team players. They tended to be trying to negotiate win-wins all the time and to build up a network of contacts around them. They were be very, very well-connected. The unlucky people tended to be socially isolated. If they had an idea they hadn't really going to want to bounce it off of. They haven’t got that experience or talking to somebody and then going, “Oh! You should be my friend.” They’re really interested in that, and that plays an absolute key role in success. That was about the social side of it rather than the cognitive side.

[0:23:55.2] MB: That's really interesting, and so that’s kind of another one of these learned behaviors, is that if you become more social, you can also create luck essentially through sort of the network effect of meeting and engaging with more people. 

[0:24:09.9] RW: Oh, absolutely. I can remember one lucky person who came into the lab and they were trying to sell their car. So we’re doing the experiment, on the way out, they spoke to one of the secretaries in the department and they were chatting and then the secretary, “You’re not interested in buying a new car, because I’ve got a car I’m trying to —” and the secretory, “Oh! I am actually. How weird you mentioned that. I am.” The two of them got chatting and he ended up selling his car to her. Now that's a very, very good example of him creating his own good luck. He will look back on that and go, “My goodness! What are the chances? I just happened to bump in to somebody.” 

The fact is, he was bumping into people all of the time. He was buying a [inaudible 0:24:49.0] times a day in that sense and occasionally have hit the jackpot. The unlucky people simply weren’t buying the tickets, that they weren't spending any time with other people or exploring those relationships in an open way, and so they weren't getting those opportunities. 

[0:25:02.7] MB: Yeah, it’s the old kind of analogy that you miss 100% of the shots you don't take, right? So lucky people, it sounds like — And according to the research, are essentially sort of constantly dabbling and exploring all these potential opportunities and sort of things that may emerge, and then when it does, they’re like, “Oh! Look at that, that opportunity kin of emerged.”

[0:25:24.4] RW: That’s right. Also, particularly with social networks, if you hit a node, if you hit somebody who's very well-connected, then you’re massively increasing your chances. You’re not just talking to that person or that party, your essentially talking to all the people they know. So if you're talking to somebody who’s well-connected, it might be that that opportunities is not for them, but they'll say, “Oh! Let me introduce you to so and so.” With networking, the way it works in terms of how we connected to others, it's very easy to get access to a very large number of people, and that’s what the lucky people were so skilled at doing. 

[0:26:02.1] MB: I think digging down the rabbit hole of how to build relationships and social networking is probably beyond the full scope of our conversation, but for visitors who are curious, we do have another interview with Keith Ferrazzi that goes super deep into a lot of strategies you can use to implement many of those different things. 

I'm curious, I’d love to kind of transition a little bit. I mean, the luck factor and all the work you did there is really fascinating, but I want to talk about some of the other work you’ve done, because I also think it's really aligned with what the show focuses on and what we often talk about on here. In 59 Seconds, which is one of your other books, you talk at length about sort of debunking some of the myths and confusion points in self-help. I'm curious, what kind of lead you to want to write that book? 

[0:26:46.7] RW: 59, I mean, all the books have slightly old origins. 59, was because I went out for lunch, I think it was, with a friend of mine who’s quite the CEO in quite a big organization, and she started to talk about happiness and she said, “Oh, you know a bit about happiness. How does it work in terms of psychology?” 

I started to answer and she said, “I’m quite a busy person. Can you really tell me and sort of cut it down a bit?” I said, “How long have you got?” She said, “Around about a minute,” and I thought that's kind of an intuition. [inaudible 0:27:19.2] ideas in psychology, that can be conveyed [inaudible 0:27:22.5] .Originally, the book was called 60 Seconds, and we round, and it was about evidence-based — In less than a minute, and at one meeting I said precisely that, I said less than a minute and someone said, “It’s not 60 seconds. It's 59 seconds,” and that's a much better title for all sorts of reasons.

So part of that book is debunking the myths of self-help, things which we all like to believe, which simply aren’t true and therefore are hurting us, and then the other parties, and here is what you can actually do to be more successful in these various domains, such as happiness and relationships and parenting and so on. That was the origins of that book, and it then became a very successful YouTube channel and has been all around the world again. So it is probably the book I’m best known for, and actually the quickest one to write. I think that was probably written about two months. So it was [inaudible 0:28:15.6] stuff that I've been storing up in my head.

[0:28:20.4] MB: You're probably listening to the show because you want to master new skills and abilities that you can use to live a rich and rewarding life. That's why I'm excited to tell you once again about our incredible sponsor for this show, Skillshare. Skillshare is an online learning community with over 16,000 courses in design, business and more. 

You can learn everything from logo design, to social media marketing, to street photography, and they offer unlimited access to all of their courses for a low monthly price, so you never have to pay per course again. They have some awesome courses on though that I personally love including mastering Evernote, getting in the mind mapping, which is an incredible skillset, learning how to draw, and much more. 

If you want to get a leg up on graphic design, social media, even your culinary knife skills, be sure to check out Skillshare. Right now they're offering an incredible value to our listeners. You can get three months of Skillshare for just $0.99. Go to skillshare.com/success99 to redeem this offer. You can get three months for $0.99. They’ve been incredible sponsor. They’ve been supporting the show for months. Go check out their website. It's absolutely awesome. 

Now back to the show. 

[0:29:36.7] MB: What were some of the bit myths that you uncovered that kind of permeates self-help?

[0:29:42.0] RW: I think the biggest one was this notion of visualization, that there are so many self-help books that tell people to visualize endpoint. That is to visualize yourself in five years in the perfect relationship, perfect career, whatever it is. When you look at the psychology to an experiment, there is a single experiment that doesn't say that that is a terrible, terrible idea. It makes you feel good, which is why people like doing it. The problem is in terms of success and in terms of bringing that [inaudible 0:30:17.6] into reality, it sets your expectations very high and encourages you not to do anything else. All you need to do is dream. 

So when that future doesn't emerge, then you become very discouraged. You think like, “I gave it my best shot, and I’m quite fatalistic,” and so very unlikely to move on throughout the strategies. There’s probably about 10, 15 papers now showing across pretty much every domain, that aspect, that application of visualization is a terrible idea. 

There’s an equally large literature that says that visualization is a powerful tool, but you visualize process, not endpoint. If you want to do well in an exam, you visualize yourself doing the sorts of things. good students do; asking questions in class, revising, going a little bit further than the other students, or whatever. You don't visualize yourself sitting down and having a wonderful exam or opening an envelope and taking out an A-grate certificate. I think that was one of the key things. I mean, that notion, that visualization of endpoint is now all over the place, but I think we’re the first to sort of bring it into kind of public consciousness. 

[0:31:25.9] MB: That is a great distinction, because I think it gets lost on a lot of people when they talk about visualization. The methodology itself can be effective, but it needs to be applied to a process as opposed to an endpoint. 

[0:31:38.1] RW: That’s correct, then there’s a large literature suggesting exactly that. Even [inaudible 0:31:42.9] it wasn't known, and so all these athletes were being encouraged to visualize exactly the wrong thing. So it's a complete waste of time. It was nice to sort of dig up some of these. 

The other one was brainstorming. This notion of all getting together in the room and coming up with ideas, again, reduces creativity by around about 20%. As we speak, there’ll be organizations around the world where everyone is sitting around in a room and trying to solve a problem in a creative way brainstorming terrible and apply it in that particular way. 

What is far more effective is everyone brainstorms on their own, and they arrive at that meeting of ideas and you go around the table and everyone discusses their three ideas. Then you see big increases in both the number of ideas, obviously, and the originality. It’s a very simple tweak, but it’s very important one. We’ve been getting brainstorming wrong for many, many years. 

[0:32:42.0] MB: That makes a lot of sense. What was the sort of science or the reasoning behind why brainstorming in a group is so ineffective? 

[0:32:49.9] RW: There’s two bits of science behind it. One is social loafing, which is anyone in the group, and some people would just simply not try very hard, because [inaudible 0:33:00.1]. One, they’re thinking, “Well, if I come up with a key idea, the whole group gets the kind of glory for that, which I don’t like the sound of.” The other is, “I can just lean back and let everyone else do the work,” and both of those ideas means that people don't tend to engage very much. 

The other is that within any group, you’ll get some people that dominate, and who knew the most dominating people are not the most creative, and they end up telling you all their ideas and the quieter people don't get a word in. So simply by having this very simple intervention would change of everyone arriving with three ideas get rid of all of those problems very, very effectively. 

[0:33:40.7] MB: What were some of the other kind myths that permeate self-help that you uncovered in 59 Seconds?

[0:33:47.8] RW: There’s quite a few of them in there. I mean, right I think when I was writing it, the notion of the Harvard motivational stuff, which is the study where the Harvard researchers — I mean, [inaudible 0:33:59.1]. It’s credited various universities, but normally Harvard. Harvard researchers go in, ask kids what they want to be when they grow up and only 3% know, and that 3% for 20 something years accounts for 90% of the income of the cohort. Used all over the place to encourage people to get their kids to focus very young, and when you look at the evidence for it, there’s simply isn’t any evidence. That's a complete work of fiction. That experiment has never been conducted, and people need to know that. there is no hard evidence that getting children to focus very young will have any positive impact on their the long-term success or career. 

Again, parents didn't know, and I regularly taught organizations, and you get people in the audience saying, “I just had no idea that's entirely fictitious.” There's quite a lot of kind of myth busting in that book. 

[0:34:52.1] MB: I’m curious, because one of the things that we focus on a lot on the Science of Success is what we call evidence-based growth, which is basically thinking about the world from the perspective of evidence first and trying to understand what does the science say, what does evidence say and what is that mean for us as individuals trying to achieve our goals and sort of create a better world? Why do you think that it's so hard within self-help to bring that evidence to the forefront? Often, it seems like there's so much noise that it's really challenging to sort of distinguish what the signal is. 

[0:35:34.1] RW: I think it’s [inaudible 0:35:34.7] two reasons. One is that we’re equipped with common sense. One of the problem being is often wrong, but intuitively, it feels like if you get kids to focus young, that would be a good thing. Intuitively, it feels that sitting around a room and kicking around some ideas is a good thing. Intuitions are often wrong. 

That’s one reasons why it’s tricky. The other is that the psychological literature is really spread out. I mean, it is immense now, and that you need a fair bit of expertise to even find out where the relevant papers are, and even more expertise be able to read them and actually know what they're trying to say in terms of the data. 

I think it is very, very tough for people to actually find the evidence, and that was really the thinking behind 59 Seconds, to be honest actually. We’re saying to people, “Look. I will do all that hard work for you,” and I think I probably read close a couple of thousand papers, academic papers for that book, “I will do all that hard work and then I will present it in a way that I think is fair and with some take-home messages.” But I think it’s very, very difficult, particularly now with the web when there are just so many websites out there telling you so many different things, and unless you have access to those primary sources, you’re not really going to know who or what to believe.

[0:36:51.6] MB: And so what can sort of a well-intentioned individual who is not a scientist do if they're looking for these kind of bastions of evidence-based strategies in today's world?

[0:37:04.9] RW: Obviously, read my books is the main thing. That's why I always advise anyone that. But I think always ask the question, “Where is the evidence? Where is this coming from?” Also, how much are you investing in it, because if it is something which is going to take you a couple of hours every day or something like that, you’re going to want to know that there is some kind of evidential underpinning that is in a peer-review journal or whatever it is. I just think asking for evidences is absolutely key, and not believing something just because it sounds plausible or it's easy. If it’s the sort of thing which you enjoy doing, well, it may not be having a wonderful effect on your life. Also, if you're not becoming more successful with it, if it’s not making you happier or improving relationships [inaudible 0:37:51.5], just stop and do something else. It's not rocket science, and I appreciate that it can be quite tricky for people particularly on the evidential front. 

[0:38:00.6] MB: Yeah, I think that’s a struggle that we think about a lot, is how can — Obviously, on the show, we take a lot of time. We read through a lot of the research. We try to find people who have done their homework and actually speak from a position of sort of scientific authority, but it’s definitely a struggle, and I think a lot about there's so much just noise out there. How can we see through the mist and figure out, “All right. What’s actually true? What's actually effective?” It’s something that's kind of a mission of ours and that we spent a lot of time thinking about.

[0:38:34.7] RW: It’s important work, and it’s even more important when you move out to the health domain where people are doing all sorts of weird procedures that aren’t helping at all. Some of the sort of cutting edge health research showing some of things we thought were extremely helpful [inaudible 0:38:48.8] in terms of some sorts of surgery and pills and so on has simply having no effect. If it's a problem there, it’s definitely going to be a problem when you move over to psychology. 

[0:38:59.5] MB: I'm curious, there's one other strategy that you talked about and 59 Seconds that I thought was really interesting, which is the idea of writing your own eulogy. Can you talk a little bit about that?

[0:39:11.5] RW: Yeah, it’s a lovely idea. I mean, it's — Well, not when you come to do it. It’s quite a terrifying idea [inaudible 0:39:16.9] it’s lovely, which is this notion that we don't realize perhaps [inaudible 0:39:21.6] life is and it’s very easy to get distracted and to just simply have a good time and not think about the bigger picture. It’s only when you get slightly drawn in life, these thoughts to realize there are things you wish you had done and that something’s a little bit more meaningful than others and so on. Writing your own eulogy is a nice way of cutting to the chase. So you say to somebody, “What do you want someone to stand up at your own funeral and say about you?” It's a very effective way of setting goals. 

If you ask people to do that, then look at the discrepancy between what they've written for that perfect eulogy and their life as it currently is, you can see people suddenly start to shift and go, “Well, I'd like someone to stand up in my funeral and say what a kind person I've been and I’ve helped to my friends and family, and then you say, “So, currently, are you helping your friends or family?” They say, “No, I'm not,” and so is fairly obvious where the shift is. 

It’s a lovely exercise. There's a lot of psychology to the back that up and into a field called terror management, and it's very interesting. Yeah, it's something I recommend actually to all my students.

[0:40:31.7] MB: What is terror management?

[0:40:33.3] RW: Terror management theory is this notion that there are certain things that scare us and how we respond to that. Of course, the biggest thing that scares us is death, and so most people run away from death. Actually, you want people to confront the fact [inaudible 0:40:52.7] on the few things we know with 100% certainty. Actually, it isn't quite scary. It can be quite empowering, and that is a very old idea. I mean, the idea of memento mori, which was you see skeletons in paintings or something like that, those of there to remind the viewer that life is short and that you should live the best life possible right now, because your life might end much sooner than you think. So it's a very old psychological intervention [inaudible 0:41:22.4]. 

[0:41:23.1] MB: I want to segue now and get into a little bit, just talk about the as if principle. I find that really, really fascinating and that’s something that I think is worthwhile to share with the listeners. Would you talk a little bit about kind of what that is and how you came to talk about that? 

[0:41:40.8] RW: Yeah, the as if principle, again, dates back to the roots of psychology, and particularly to William James who’s one of the founding fathers of psychology around the turn of the last century, and the obvious way of looking at the link between — Let's go with behavior and emotion, is that your emotions create certain behaviors, and that feels like common sense. When you feel happy, you smile. 

What James did was to question that and turn it on its head and say, “Well, is the opposite true? Is there a kind of back channel?” which is that if you face, forced your face into a smile, do you end up feeling happier? He was an experimentalist. He was a philosopher, and so pose that question in various domains before the experimentalists come along and start to go, “Let’s ask that question. When you behave in certain ways, does that affect the way you think and the way you feel?” and they found that it did. You behave as if you are happy, you feel happier. You behave as if you're confident, you feel more confident. That is the basis of the book which in America is called the as if principle. I just explored that very simple idea in lots of different domains.

[0:43:00.0] MB: Is that essentially the idea of fake it till you make it?

[0:43:04.6] RW: A little bit. I think it's not same as that, and in part because the word kind of fake it has a slightly different meaning to it, but it is that notion that if you, yes, behave in a certain way, that will affect how you think and feel.

Fake it until you make it is often about how it [inaudible 0:43:23.8] to perceive you and it’s not quite that. It's more about how your behavior affects yourself, and then that affects others. The fake it till you make it is, “Oh! I’m going to appear very confident and other people will see me as more confident.” The as if principle is, “I'm going to act more confident. That makes me feel more confident, and therefore I am perceived as more confident.” 

[0:43:45.6] MB: Tell me a little about the science behind that. What does kind of research say or should you share some of the specific conclusions or examples from some of the studies?

[0:43:55.4] RW: Well, in terms of the [inaudible 0:43:58.2] pathways, we don’t really know, to be honest. There is a very profound theory that sits behind it, and this is why it interested William James. The theory is that your entire common sense notion that you feel happy and, therefore, smile, is simply wrong, that you have no idea how you feel until you observe yourself. It gets to the roots of consciousness.

So the idea is that sort of there’s someone sitting in your head that’s watching your behavior and then deciding how you feel. So according to that theory, it’s absolutely crucial that you behave in sort of certain ways, because it really does influence how you literally see yourself. There is a profound debate within the consciousness movement about why it might work. 

What we do know is across very many different domains, you see the same effect again and again and again, and so in fact actually one of the most controversial illustrations of it, but still one which I think [inaudible 00:45:08.3] merit is the power posing, which is Amy Cuddy’s work, where you stand in some ways and you feel more powerful and so on. Now, there’s a lot of debate about that particular brand work, but still the fundamental principle there, which is your actions dictate how you and think, I think is sound. 

[0:45:28.3] MB: Tell me a little bit about specifically, how does the as if principle apply in the context of things like phobias, anxiety, or depression? 

[0:45:37.2] RW: Well, if we take the last of those, depression, it's a very effective way of getting people out of depression, which is that you get to behave as if they're not depressed. If you get [inaudible 0:45:46.7] depressed people to be far more active, to do things like gardening, to be more involved in exercise and so on, it alleviates the depression reasonably rapidly. The same with phobias, where if you're scared of whatever it is, a spider, if you slowly bring a spider toward someone, you get them to behave as if they are not afraid, i.e., they relax and calm down, it gets rid of the phobia very quickly. 

It's a very simple idea, but it sits throughout the entire history of psychology and all these different domains which actually hadn't ever been pulled together before. So that book is talking or reviewing areas which actually within the academic psychology would normally be seen as quite separate and populated by academics that don't normally talk to one another across those areas. 

[0:46:34.8] MB: You have kind of a specific, kind of concrete example of how somebody could apply the as if principle to happiness, for example. Just thinking about if I want to be happier, what sort of things would I do if I were happier that make sense?

[0:46:51.0] RW: Yeah. Well, happiness is the easiest one, because you think, “Well, how do I behave when I’m happy?” Maybe you sing and maybe you dance and maybe you smile and maybe you talk to other people and maybe you go out for the evening to a party. Well, do all those things. Do all those things and you will feel happier. 

The problem is motivating yourself to do that, but once you do these things, you’ll feel happier. So all you say, “How do I behave when I think and feel like that? Okay, I'll force myself to do that,” and the effect is very, very fast. So you feel those effects within about 30, 40 seconds. They’re some of the fastest moving effects in psychology. It's simple stuff, but for some reason it’s not something that often comes up on people's kind of common sense radar until the start to think about it. 

[0:47:38.4] MB: Dow do we regenerate the willpower, the motivation to actually take those actions, especially, I feel like it’s hardest to do that when you're in a negative state. 

[0:47:49.0] RW: It is hard, but it’s not that hard. I think singing if you’re on your own, singing a song, dancing around, whatever, they’re not that difficult things to do. It’s not like some huge happiness intervention where you need to think about your explanatory style or whether you’ve just supplied it, but It is just having a good time. I think that's very important. 

It's also in terms of explaining in a way your internal states, and so if you're either nervous before a talk and you can feel these butterflies in your stomach, you can re-label those. You can say, “Well, I’m not nervous. I'm acting as if I'm excited, and that re-labeling then changes how you see yourself and you go, “Well, I’m excited to give this talk. Let me get up there and start.” Not, “I'm nervous. I don’t really want to go up there and start.” It can also apply to how do you label and perceive internal states. 

[0:48:42.1] MB: Labeling could also be kind of a powerful component of acting as if you were happy or confident or excited, etc. 

[0:48:50.7] RW: That's right. If you see your own behavior in a different way and in a more positive way, then that, again, changes how you think of and feel. It’s a curious one, because the principle, the theory, links together all these different ideas in psychology and it's, for me, why the book was interesting to do, because it goes right across motivation and persuasion. So if you're trying to get someone to do something and you stop paying them more and more money, their motivation drops. The reason being, well, what sort of tasks you need to pay me to do a task that I really don't like. So when you stop making [inaudible 0:49:29.8] behave as if I don't like this task by giving me more and more money to do it, you see my motivation drop. It starts to explain these kind of counterintuitive findings that you see in psychology. 

[0:49:41.4] MB: What would be one piece of homework you would give our listeners to concretely implement some of the ideas and strategies that we’ve talked about today?

[0:49:50.3] RW: Oh my goodness! I think I see picking up on what you’re saying, the eulogy I think is good. I would say probably the best thing that comes out of 59 in terms of excess is the pre-mortem, the idea that before any — You convince yourself, that project has been an utter disaster, and you try and figure out why it failed so badly. It's one of the most effective ways of finding our problems with a scheme before that scheme starts, because otherwise you get this huge rose-tinted view, you're convinced it's going to be great and you don't take the necessary precautionary steps. I think the pre-mortem is very helpful.

[0:50:26.8] MB: And where listeners go if they want to find you, your books and all these resources online?

[0:50:32.4] RW: Richardwiseman.com is my websites and the links off there will take you to my YouTube channel, which is In 59 Seconds, which has all these tips and hints there in minutes. Then, obviously, there’s the books. We’ve spoken about Luck Factor and 59 Seconds, as if principle [inaudible 0:50:52.1] sleeping and dreaming and a book called Night School. This is all out there and it’s lovely when people read that material and feedback, and so if people have supported that work over the years, my thanks and gratitude to them. 

[0:51:04.1] MB: Richard, thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing all these wisdom, so many different strategies and concrete evidence-based things for people to implement their lives. It's been an honor to have you on here. 

[0:51:14.2] RW: Thank you very much. Thank you for the opportunity. 

[0:51:16.3] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. We created the show to help you, our listeners, master evidence-based growth. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@successpodcast.com. That's matt@successpodcast.com. I'd love to hear from you and I read and respond to every single listener email. 

I'm going to give you three reasons why you should sign up for our email list today by going to successpodcast.com signing up right on the homepage. There are incredible stuff that’s only available to those on the email list, so be sure to sign up, including an exclusive curated weekly email from us called Mindset Monday, which is short, simple, filled with articles, stories, things that we found interesting, fascinating in the world of evidence-based growth in the last week. 

Next, you're going to get an exclusive chance to shape the show including voting on guests, submitting your own personal questions that we’ll ask guests on air and much more. Lastly, you’re going to get a free guide we created based on listener demand, our most popular guide which is called How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely for free along with another surprise bonus guide by signing up and joining the email us today. Again, you can do that at successpodcast.com, sign up right the homepage, or if you're on the go, just text the word “smarter”, S-M-A-R-T-E-R to the number 44222. 

Remember, that the greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend, either live or online. If you enjoyed this episode, please leave us an awesome review and subscribe in iTunes, because that helps boost the algorithm, that helps us move up the iTunes rankings and helps more people discover the Science of Success. 

Don't forget, if you want to get all the incredible information we talked about in the show; links, transcripts, everything we discussed and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. You can get those at successpodcast.com, just hit the show notes button right at the top. 

Thanks again, and we'll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success.


January 25, 2018 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
ROBERTThurman-01.png

Finding Joy In A World Full of Suffering - Lessons From a Former Buddhist Monk with Robert Thurman

December 28, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

This episode is a bit off the beaten path for us here at the Science of Success. Given this time of year, when many are thinking, reflecting, and being a bit more spiritual - we wanted to offer a different perspective. This episode is not as science based, but still provides a fascinating dialogue with a Buddhist monk, who was the first westerner ordained by the Dalai Lama, on life, meditation, mindfulness, and much more with our guest Robert Thurman.

Robert Thurman is a Professor of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist Studies in the Department of Religion at Columbia University, and President of the American Institute of Buddhist Studies. Time magazine has called Robert “the leading American expert on Tibetan Buddhism.” and named him one of Time Magazine most influential Americans in 1997. Robert was the first westerner ever to be ordained as a Tibetan Monk by the Dalai Lama and his work and books have been featured all over the globe.

  • How Robert’s journey took him to becoming a Tibetan Monk under the Dalai Llama

  • The human being is a learning machine

  • The dogma of materialism - mind is the power that directs matter

  • Inner science / buddhist science

  • The basic misunderstandings of buddhism from a western perspective

  • Life is suffering

    1. It’s just meditation

  • Meditation without context isn’t useful

  • The two kinds of meditation

  • Clearing your mind of thinking / emptying the mind

    1. Analytic / critical meditation or “insight meditation”

    2. Thinking something directed towards the exploration of yourself, ideas, or things around you

  • How an egotistical approach creates “guaranteed misery” - you could become the most powerful person on the planet and people still wont think you’re important

  • Why enlightenment is not clearing your mind of thoughts

  • The importance of focusing on and being open to other people

  • You can learn if you examine yourself and your world

  • The unexamined life will be frustrating

  • “Dis-identifying from the thought flow” will not get you to enlightenment

  • Look more objectively at your thought flow - see where thought flows arise, penetrate the thought flow, see the negative thoughts and the positive thoughts

  • What thought is that?

    1. How accurate is it?

    2. Where does it come from?

    3. Whose voice is it? my mother’s voice? my fathers? my uncles? my teacher?

    4. Gain leverage on how the mind works, edit how the mind works reinforce the positive insights, de-enforce the negative insights

  • Stripping away false identities and beliefs

  • It’s helpful to have help of others - mobilize minds that are further along the path than you are - your the only one who can learn your reality in a viscerally transformative way - use their help and follow their methods

  • How Eckart Tolle battled back from the verge of suicide - looking critically at negative thoughts

  • Experiential understanding of the nature of reality - reality is beyond anyone’s idea of reality

  • The experience of reality is beyond our ability to describe it

  • How does the Dalai Llama keep up his joy, good humor, and happiness in a world full of so much suffering?

  • The nature of life itself is blissful. Reality is good. The more you’re open to reality, the happier you are.

  • Broaden your attitude and orientation, don’t deny the bad experiences

  • When you’re miserable, you can’t help people. When you’re happy, you can.

  • You have to put your own happiness oxygen mask on before you can help anyone else

  • The habitual perception that we are our own isolated egos vs the universe

  • Interconnectedness of all life

  • Suffering and frustration are rooted in the false belief that you and your ego are the most important thing

  • The universe is empty of any non-relational entity

  • Buddhism is the opposite of ignorance is bliss, reality is bliss. You already have bliss, you have blocks of knowing and feeling and understand it. It’s YOU. You’re made of it.

  • Wave particle paradox, Heinsberg uncertainty and the science of interconnectedness

  • Quantum physics, buddhism and the observer paradox

iTunes Button.png
Stitcher Button.png
Android Button.png
YouTube.png

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SkillShare.png

This Episode of The Science of Success is brought to you by our partners at Skillshare! For a limited time, Skillshare is offering our listeners One Month of UNLIMITED ACCESS ABSOLUTELY FREE! Just go towww.skillshare.com/success to redeem your free unlimited month NOW!

Are you a professional looking to get a leg-up at work? Or just someone who just loves learning new things? Are you looking to do your job better?

Want to add some impressive skills to your resume? Skillshare is an online learning community with over sixteen thousand classes in design, business, and more. You can learn everything from logo design to social media marketing to street photography. Unlimited access to all of this for a low monthly price – never pay PER class again!

Again, Skillshare is giving our listeners a month of unlimited access - absolutely FREE! Go to
www.skillshare.com/success to redeem your free month!

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

[Search List] Robert Thurman Amazon book list
[Wiki Article] The Thinker
[SoS Episode] Limiting Beliefs
[Book] The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment by Eckhart Tolle
[Wiki Article] Wave–particle duality
[Wiki Article] Observer effect (physics)
[TEDEd Video] What is the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? - Chad Orzel
[Video] The Real Meaning of E=mc² | Space Time | PBS Digital Studios
[Personal Site] Bob Thurman
[Book] Man of Peace: The Illustrated Life Story of the Dalai Lama of Tibet by William Meyers, Robert Thurman, and Michael G. Burbank

Episode Transcript


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success introducing your host, Matt Bodnar.

[0:00:11.8] MB: Welcome to the Science of Success; the number one evidence-based growth podcast on the internet with more than a million downloads and listeners in over a hundred countries. 

This episode is a bit off the beaten path for us here at the Science of Success. Given the time of year when many are thinking, reflecting, being a bit more spiritual, we wanted to offer a little bit different of a perspective. This episode is not a science-based, but it still provides a fascinating dialogue with a Buddhist monk, who is the first Westerner ever to be ordained by the Dalai Lama. We discussed life, meditation, mindfulness, and much more with our guest Robert Thurman.

I’m going to give you three really quick reasons why you should join our e-mail list today by going to successpodcast.com and signing up right on the homepage. There is some amazing stuff that’s available only to our e-mail subscribers, including a special guide called How to Organize and Remember Everything that we created based on listener demand, curated weekly e-mails that you’re going to get every single week, including our Mindset Monday e-mail, which listeners have been absolutely loving short, sweet articles and stories that we found fascinating within the last week, and a chance to shape the show. You can vote on guests, submit your own questions to our guests and much more.

Sign up today by going to successpodcast.com. You can sign up right on the homepage. There is some incredible stuff that you only get access to when you sign up and join the e-mail list. You can also, if you’re on the go right now, if you’re driving around, if you’re on your phone, just text the word “smarter”, that’s S-M-A-R-T-E-R to the number 44222. That’s “smarter” to 44222.

In our previous episode, we discussed one of the most important evidence-based psychology principles that makes people successful; self-awareness. We looked at the difference between people who succeed and those who plateau.

We talked about why self-awareness is the meta-skill of the 21st century, and a foundational skill required to succeed in nearly anything; including looking at conclusions from over 800 scientific studies about self-awareness with our guest Dr. Tasha Eurich. If you want to master the most vital skill in the 21st century, listen to that episode.

Now for the interview. But before we get into that, I wanted to make note, the audio quality in this interview is not the greatest. We had a little bit of trouble on Robert’s end with some of the sound quality issues. I just wanted to let you know ahead of time that Robert’s audio is not perfect, but there’s some really good insights in this conversation and I felt it was still worth sharing with you.

Now for the show.

[0:02:48.1] MB: Today, we have another fascinating guest on the show, Robert Thurman. Robert is a professor of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist studies in the Department of Religion at Columbia University, and the President of the American Institute of Buddhist studies. Time Magazine has called him the leading American expert on Tibetan Buddhism and named him one of Time Magazine’s most influential Americans in 1997.

He was also the first Westerner to ever be ordained a Tibetan monk by the Dalai Lama. His works and books have been featured across the globe. Bob, welcome to the Science of Success.

[0:03:21.7] RT: Thanks, Matt. Nice to talk to you.

[0:03:23.9] MB: Well, we’ve very excited to have you on the show today. For listeners who may not be familiar with you and your background, I know you’ve had a fascinating story. I’d love to hear a little bit about your personal journey and how that led you to eventually becoming a monk and where you are today.

[0:03:39.0] RT: Well, okay. I was a Harvard undergraduate and I decided that western psychology and philosophy didn’t quite get it right. I decided to go to India to see some deeper psychology. I had a sense it would be there. When I got there, there were a lot of really nice Indians, but I got really turned on by the Tibetans and the knowledge they have of Indian Buddhism, of ancient Indian Buddhism.

I started studying with them, and that’s 54 years ago, 55 years ago and never turned back. I found the philosophical solutions I was looking for, the openness of mind to new questions I was looking for, the yogas, the meditations, everything. The people, they were just really great. I was speaking their language in about three months, and it was like coming home.

I’m still doing that. I must say I was a monk for about four to five years. But now I’m an ex-monk and I have a big family. Didn’t damage me forever. That’s pretty much my story. Joining academia is like coming back to another kind of monastery, where you – they were the American one, you know where you’re having family and you study what you want and you teach what you want after a while. It’s a privilege. It’s a wonderful thing. The human being is a learning machine and that’s what they should be doing with their life.

[0:05:01.3] MB: I’m really curious. As somebody who’s such an expert in something like Buddhism, where do you see some of the common western misunderstanding of the core principles of Buddhism?

[0:05:15.1] RT: Well, western and eastern people do misunderstand Buddhism. It isn’t really an east-west thing. Because misunderstand themselves and they misunderstand life. Buddhism as it is in a way never really interested me, I have to say. But Buddhist science and the knowledge of the mind and the knowledge of reality was what really interested me.

I think that has a lot to offer to west and east, and especially modern science is a little bit caught nowadays by the dogma of materialism. The idea that the mind doesn’t exist, that mind over matter doesn’t work. That’s a big error. Mind is actually really the power that directs matter, I would say, which Buddhist science has a very strong evidence and arguments about. That really is usual to people.

I consider I’m going ever deeper into that. I don’t claim to be enlightened or anything, but I’ve gotten in that direction and I’m sure there is that direction, put it that way. Everyone can do that. That’s what the human is built for. That’s what I like to do. I call it really a Buddhist science really, or inner science as it’s called in India.

Yoga and Hinduism has a lot of that too, because Buddhism totally influence every country it was ever in. It was in all the [0:06:27.2] countries have had a huge impact on them. Having discovered it, I think it’s going to have a huge impact here. It already has that some impact and it was gone with one. I think one thing that – the basic misunderstanding is that Buddhism teaches you and that all you can do is suffer and you can never get away from it and you’re better be resigned to it. That’s one of the big misunderstandings.

Before our Buddha discovered happiness, actually that’s what he discovered and how to get rid of suffering permanently. The second misunderstanding is that Buddhism is just meditating, and that’s also a mistake. Meditation is a powerful tool for transforming yourself on learning, but it must be preceded by scientific learning and lot of critical investigation, exploration and thinking and experiencing and analyzing your experience and seeing how your mind works.

Then when you get a bit of orientation about what you are, what reality is, then meditation enables you to really bring it down to your gut and really change your life more thoroughly. I mean, learning changes your life very much too, but to completely transform, you need to add meditation to learning.

You don’t just do meditation out of the bat. If you just meditate because somebody tells you that meditation is the solution to everything, you are basically deepening your ignorance actually. You’ll become more egotistical and you become more isolated and alienated more into yourself, which is not really a usual place to be stuck in. Not to send it wrong with including yourself, but being stuck in yourself is really not a good scene.

[0:07:58.5] MB: I want to dig into a couple different pieces of that. Let’s start with this idea that meditation without context isn’t useful. Tell me a little bit more about that.

[0:08:06.5] RT: Well, there is two kinds. One kind of meditation is just shutting your mind down and not thinking, which gives the person brought up in our school system a buzz, because we’ve been doing a lot of thinking. That we haven’t felt that thinking has done us a lot of good, because we still bit unhappy.

We get a buzz out of not thinking. But actually what that also does it dulls your ability to learn from experience, to teach reason from learning and from books. It gives you a palliative, it’s like getting hooked on a palliative, because you can just stop thinking and then now come down and then some people even think you’d be enlightened when you have nothing in your mind.

I was joking like to say, when Buddha entertained enlightenment, the first thing he didn’t say – he said, “That was not the answer.” What he said was, “I know everything. It’s really great. Reality really is fine and you can be – it is happiness. If you know reality, you’re going to be happy.” Unfortunately, of course just by me telling you, you can’t get there.  You have to go to work on it yourself, but you have amazing ability to learn and also to transform once you have learned. That’s the thing. That’s one type of meditation is just emptying the mind type.

Then the other type, which is more important is analytic meditation, or critical meditation, and what they call inside meditation. That’s where you’re actually are thinking something directed toward exploration of yourself, your experience and the reality around you. That’s a very good one and a very important one. If you don’t do that one, then you just do the mind empty one, then your original view of yourself and everyone has a slightly distorted view of the self, by conditioning, by instinct, by formalize and so on, which is that each one thinks, “I am the most important one.”

They don’t think that they’re being egotistical. They think that’s naturally, “Everybody thinks I’m the most important.” They think that’s just the natural way to be. But then that puts you at conflict with everybody else who doesn’t agree with you. That puts you in a guaranteed program for misery actually, since nobody else will agree that you’re the most important, and yet you will keep struggling to show that you are in some way, but still then out of it, you could become president of the United States and people will still will not think you’re the most important. You’ll get really freaked out.

The key is that if you then meditate however, without having examined your distorted self-image, your central CPU, your distorted inner wiring, then you will simply intensify your inner wiring and you will not transform yourself, you will not move to a more open-minded, open-hearted interrelated way of being where you start getting along better with others. You notice them more, because you’re less focused on yourself.

You get better feedback from them, because they notice that you’re noticing them and they like you, etc., etc., and you can be more successful. Success really comes in life not just from any big thing you do about yourself, but it comes from how open you are to other people and how you see what they need, what they want, you listen to their advice, you can see their perspective, then you can actually deal with them and others and everyone much better, and even yourself. You’ll feel much happier and you’ll feel much more capable. That’s the key thing.

[0:11:24.6] MB: There’s a bunch of different ways I want to dig into this. Let’ start with the idea of analytic meditation, or critical meditation, or inside meditation. What does that mean, and what does that look like practically?

[0:11:36.1] RT: Well, it looks like thinking something over and investigating it. It means that you don’t, when you sit, if you do sit or whatever posture, although better not to take the posture road as thinker, because it’s much too uncomfortable to maintain for a very long time, if you know what it looks like.

Anyway, when you sit down to think over something, you explore it and you’re fueled by the realization why taking a little bit confident in the great teachers of humanity saying that you as a human being are capable of understanding something more deeply. An analysis means you take things apart, you’re looking at its components, you see how it’s made, you look at its quotation, and you see its context, and you go deeper and deeper, then you look at the parts and you take that apart.

Anyway, ultimately, you can analyze everything to pieces and it will disappear. But then you know how it’s put together. You do that about yourself. Then when you do, you’ll get more aware of your moving parts inside, especially inside your mind, but your body also. Then the more you’re aware of that ,the  better you can make them function.

Of course, do really completely get at, then you do have to fit it with a one point of concentration ability. Otherwise, if you just keep scanning and you scatter yourself too much. But the scanning one is the most important one, and you can penetrate right to where you have an experiential understanding of the nature of reality.

Also, you go beyond your concepts. You use your common sense to take aim, so to speak, but once you get down it becomes very experiential and you go beyond – you realize that reality is beyond, and is but this idea of reality, which is why Buddha was so special and I think he says, “Well, I understand everything, but I can’t really explain it throughout well, because it’s beyond explanation. However, what I am confident is that if you put your own head into it, you can understand it yourself. You really can.”
Given, that’s what I love by the way when I first encountered the Buddhist teachers, was the fact that they for one, unlike the western religious people, theistic religious people they didn’t say, “You just have to believe something,” whether it makes sense to you or not, because you can’t understand it ultimately. Only God can. I did it like that particularly.

Being then the scientist tell you, “Well, you can’t really understand everything. You can understand a small piece, analyze it, write it down, make a formula. But then that will open up to you how much more you don’t know sort of routine.” Finally, also you can understand.

Both those western options and actually other cultures too are pretty much weakening of the human ability to use that marvelous super computer we have in the wetware in our brain. It’s amazing. Whereas, the Buddha said, “Yes, you can really understand. You just have to put your mind to it. You have to learn. You can use for help, find teachers. But even without a teacher you can learn if you really examine yourself and your world.”

Remember Socrates, the own examined life is not worth living. Buddha never said that. He just said, “The owned examined life will be frustrating and the fully examined life will be blissful.” He took it a little further than dear old Socrates.

[0:14:43.7] MB: Before we get into the experiential understanding of the nature reality, which I’m fascinated by, I wanted to touch on the – just to clarify my understanding of this. I understand the meditative practice of sitting there, bringing your thoughts back to breath or something like that. This analytical or this insight meditation, is this an actual meditative practice, or is this more like journaling, linking, setting aside contemplative time?

[0:15:08.7] RT: Well, it is a kind of analytic practice. You see, the mindfulness craze that has swept the country tends to be taken by people as a method by bringing back to their breath of this identifying from the thought flow, and just being there, just breathing.

In a way, it’s a version of the approached state, you could say of one point it as a mind empty. In a way, its foundational of course for inside meditation, as well as one pointed or quiescent meditation. But the way most people do it, it pretty much tapers off into quiescent meditation. Inside meditation, where it is, is when you go in and you look and see how your mind is – you come to the breath, just as a way of actually heightening your awareness of the distractions really, rather than just breathing.

That is to say you begin to see what it is that takes your mind away. You look more objectively at the thought flow. You see where the mechanisms of the thought, or how does this thought arise from the sense stimulants from that memory? You penetrate that thought though. You actually then see where there are negative thoughts and where there are positive thoughts that open you, or that is thoughts that open you, or thoughts that close you down, which are the negative ones.

Then we have the words, it’s more penetrative, where you just don’t just, “Oh, that’s a thought.” But you say, “Well, what thought is that? How is it benefitting me and how accurate it is and what does it come from? Actually, who’s voice is it in? Is it my mother’s voice, my uncle’s voice? My elder sibling who always told me I was a pipsqueak or whatever it was, some put-down voice, or some teacher’s voice, or some preacher’s voice.”

The words, you begin to really gain a leverage over how the mind works. Then you begin to edit how the mind works and you reinforce the positive insights, and you reinforce the negative ones, the habitual ones that just have you spinning.

Some of the popular mindfulness insight practitioners do that to some degree, but unfortunately, I think the most of the populous ones just do it for the mind quieting. However, I’m not against that. I think that’s fine too, because some people need mind quieting. But if they just only do that, sooner or later they will be disappointed. Just the palliative of the mind quieting has not actually made them happy. It has not actually given them a deeper genius about the nature of life, and therefore they have not found bliss and they’re still frustrated.

Then really unfortunately was all would be they say, “Well, meditating is useless and it’s all useless. I’ll just go and watch TV or something.” On the other hand, of course TV is meditating, reading a book is critical thinking. In other words, when you learn verbally, externally or having the debate or a dialogue with another person is also critical thinking.

Just when you bring it inside as a meditation into your own mind, you intensify it. Although, in the tradition, I don’t know if you know anything about zen, but they have a tradition they call Dharma Combat in zen, where you debate other practitioners or your teacher. They have this very much in the Tibetan monasteries, because they say that to honestly debate yourself, that is to have one voice inside yourself challenge another one.

Like one voice, you have one habitual voice a lot of us have is, “You can’t really do that. You’re just you. You can’t really change. You’re always the same way you are.” Then the critical voice is, “Well actually, you do change all the time.” Why do you say that? “Every time you think something, you change and pushing toward transformation and seeing yourself as a work in progress and able to really develop yourself.” 

These are two voices inside. They say, it’s difficult to be honestly truly critical with yourself, unless you are pumped up to it by being critical, emotionally debating. They have debating with others as an art forum, as a learning forum, as a pre-meditated launching forum that is very powerful actually. Particularly where they mobilize these emotions, like when you make – when you’re wronged and you fight to be right, but then actually rationally you finally realize you made a mistake, that’s how you change.

Then you can do that internally and you could strip away false images, false self-identities, false constricting self-labels and things and really develop yourself as a person. That’s really important.

[0:19:27.7] MB: How do we – going back to one of the ideas you talked about within this, how do you edit the mind to reinforce positive insights and as you said de-inforce negative insights?

[0:19:38.1] RT: It’s helpful to have help over others. You read the great enlightening teachings, or some other – that a lot of them are not in Buddhism. There is greater light in teachings in Hinduism and Christianity, especially mystical Christianity, the mystical Islam, mystical Judaism Kabbalah. You mobilize minds that are further than you along that path, and they left methods.

They couldn’t just transmit their experience unfortunately, or they would have of course, but unfortunately they can’t because you are the only one who can learn your reality in a visually transformative way. There are others who have done that in whatever tradition. You use their help and they give methods and patterns and templates of where you might want to go.

You go out into your own mind and you learn to see the note, that last time I lost my temper and had totally freaked out, the last time I got brooding vindictively about how I was going to get revenge over so and so for three weeks or a month, then they moved to another city and I just continued to brood, etc.

In other words, it’s like based on a combination of experience and learning and you start editing useless mind patterns that are completely useless to you and actually debilitating to you and they weaken you. You do that gradually by learning methods to do it, and also getting help of others to do it. There are qualified teachers, therapists and even noble friends who would really like you and therefore, dare to be critical of you.

All of that will – in the case us males, often those are females who have a very sharp intuition and can often give us pointers about where we need a little redo, a little improvement. They really can. We have to overcome our male tendency not to want to listen, because we got tired of listening to our moms at some point. We’re a bunch of chauvinists. Anyway, what can you say? That was you think, maybe not you, that I should speak for myself actually.

[0:21:43.4] MB: I mean, I think there’s a lot of different insights that come out of that. I want to come back to something, sort of a concrete, even a first step or one method or strategy someone listening can use. If they say, “Hey, I want to take a first step towards insight meditation, or more specifically reinforcing the positive insights of my mind.” What is sort of the first step?

[0:22:05.6] RT: Well, first step is a little bit to calm down and that’s what they do teach well about counting the breath for example, or you can say a mantra and bring your mind back to the mantra. It’s maybe even more effective than just counting the breath. Counting the breath is very time on earth hollowed one, so that’s good.

You begin to get a little calm, you feel better, your pulse decreases, your blood pressure calms down, your breathe will slow naturally actually. Then you’re more focused. Then don’t just drop out of thought flow that you observed in your mind, and don’t just say, don’t set out and then ignore it. But rather, start to look at the content of the thought flow.

Okay, there was a distracting thought, “What was I thinking about? Was I thinking about something that happened yesterday? Was I anticipating something I imagine might happen tomorrow? When I thought about it, how did I feel? Did I make me tense or uptight? Was I frustrated by something that happened yesterday? Am I frightened of something that will happen in the future, or do I anticipate with realization I get excited and palm-sweaty about something is going to happen?”

In other words, start to look at the distractions in fact. Then the trick as you get advanced is you keep the calm and you do it calmly. You don’t get excited by it and then get distracted from the distraction. You investigate that distraction and then you begin to apply your experience and you say, “Well, what I did that day was really not that good. How I lost my temper, how I got all jealous, how whatever it was.”

I say, “Well, I should see try not to do that.” Then another time, “What can I do? Well, instead of being jealous of that person, maybe I would a little bit take their point of view. What were they thinking during that incident? Due with, maybe they were very unhappy and dissatisfied, etc. Actually, why am I being jealous of someone who themselves is miserable?”

In other words, you begin to edit your interpretation of your experience, you edit the discursive thoughts. Don’t just drop out of them. Once you have a little bit and you drop out of them, so you have a little more common concentration then you start taking a look at them. You know the famous Eckhart Tolle. Great example was his how he saved himself from suicide.

He wasn’t doing Buddhist meditation or probably no any such thing at the time. He was just being himself. He was seeker, a philosopher, a little bit of a mistake, but he got in a really depressive cycle and he was swirling down, right down the drain and this voice was telling him – his voice which he couldn’t resist, because it was acting like it was his voice.

He should do himself in there while of course it weren’t worth living. He was really getting close to and he was suicidally depressed in other words. Then what it is, is some other voice in his – he heard another voice that was also him challenging the voice that was cycling him into depression. That voice said, “Well, why should I believe you? Telling me I’m useless and worthless and life sucks and whatever it was.” Then there started to be a little bit of a debate between them.

The more critical voice began to say to the other one, “Take a hike. Stop putting me down.” He was no longer identifying that it was his immovable voice. He had another more – intelligent, more critical voice that was free. Then sooner or later, he survived very well. He wrote The Power of Now. He became Oprah’s guru. He’s a happy guy.

It had to do in becoming critically looking at his distracting thought, which in that case wasn’t distracting. He was already nailed on that bad thought that was taking him down the drain into suicide. He found this another thought. Now he doesn’t elaborate in the anecdote when he tells that in his Power of Now book. That happened, he doesn’t elaborate whether he eventually analyzed the voice that was putting him down, did it connect to a parental voice, did he connect to where they were – was the stories of that self-image that he identified as himself disapproving of himself.

I don’t know. Or maybe he did in another book. I haven’t read into that. But the Buddhist psychology totally elaborates such things, because it codifies the experience of thousands of people over thousands of years exploring themselves in that kind of a way and improving themselves and getting rid of obstacles and so and so. That’s a very concrete example, I think is very good.

Also anyone can concretely just sit, count their breath, have a distracting thought. Mind would say, “Why am I doing this?” Sometimes it’s usually criticizing yourself for what you’re doing, or that I’ll never get anywhere to do this. Or I can’t get to 10. Or even cheating. Like okay, I lost track at four. Then I’ll jump in seven, because I’ll consider that I got those out of three. People, they even cheat themselves trying to get to 10.

There will be distracting thoughts like that, and then you calm those down. But then you say, “Well then, why am I having that distracting thought?” Then find the voice in yourself that always puts you down, that always expects you not to get the best, that always expects you to fail, expects you to always be stuck in that, and find out where does that come from and look at it.

Now the trick is doing the same thing when you go to a psychotherapist in the sense that you talk to them and the push you to keep probing into your memories and things and to locate different experiences and different forms of self and different self-narratives, and help you get that improved narrative, but just took long and laborious often with them. Sometimes not, but you can do this yourself, to yourself much cheaper and actually quite quickly and effectively.

I think really a good trick that I know and some of the really best ones, I would call them insight oriented shrinks, mindful shrinks. They have the patience to do that, because they have so many they can’t – they have any scarcity of people who are frustrated and happy. They urge them to do that to accelerate the process, and I think it works very, very well. Not every case and not everybody have lived it very, very well.

[0:28:06.4] MB: In many ways, that makes me think of something we’ve talked a lot about on the podcast in the past and we’ll include this in the show notes, but we call limiting beliefs and how to root out and remove these limiting beliefs that can be holding you back, or causing you suffering in your life.

[0:28:20.1] RT: Yeah, that’s right.

[0:28:20.8] MB: We’ll put that in the show notes for listeners who are looking for some of those concrete tools. I want to circle into another topic that you talked about, Bob, which is this idea that – the concept of the experiential understanding of the nature of reality. That reality is beyond anybody’s ability to describe it. Can you tell me more about what that is and what that mean?

[0:28:42.6] RT: That’s a really fabulous thing, which can also lead and has led a lot of people to misunderstanding. That is you and I and Austin and everybody listening, we are in contact with the nature of reality all the time. Our body is touching it, ourselves are aware of it, our peripheral awareness is aware of it and so forth.

We are not attending to our contact with reality, to our own Buddha nature, you could say, where we are merged with our environment, we’re merged with others, the boundary between us and them is not so rigid. Occasionally we have like an aesthetic breakthrough and we like either delicious apple, and for a moment we just lose our mind eating that apple. That’s being in touch with the nature of reality.
The problem we have is that our conceptual apparatus is what we pay attention to. Their conceptual apparatus, all it says is apple, delicious, nice. It just has some a fewer labels. It’s latched on. We don’t cover the whole thing. They just make it fit into our preconceived idea.

Then that removes us from being in touched with the nature of reality. Therefore, some people misunderstand by thinking that, “Oh, the mind emptying meditation is the really great one, because then I won’t recognize – I won’t use my concepts and I’ll concept-free. That means I’ll be enlightened.”

Unfortunately, it’s a little more complicated, because our concepts are rooted at a deep level in the brain, in our instinct, in our culture, in our acculturation. We can suppress their manifestation briefly just by not using them, but they’re still there. They still are carving up. They happen so fast, like when you see a blue painted wall, your mind immediately sees a blue – “blue painted wall.”

Actually, your perception when you look up and see this blue surface, you don’t have code blue, but you see something. You see a surface, and actually you’re of course not seeing something out there, because buttons are bouncing off things and hitting your neurons and your brain is desperately trying to organize it, and if you’re not color blind, it organizes it into blue.

The point is, it happens so fast though the conceptual overlay, and the conceptual overlaying structure which is huge in the brain is there even when you quiet it for a while. To really liberate yourself where you can have gut experience of the whole universe, you have to use the concepts to unravel the concepts. The thing is like, in the old time when you make fire with wood, like a boy scout, when you rub a bow back and forth over a stick, or spin it with your hands, with some little dust, or a little kindling there, then the stick itself will burn.

You use the concept like a fire to stir the concepts, to where then they consume themselves and then your experience, your perceptual experience, your intuitive, direct, unmediated experience will move out into feeling at one with the things that you’re seeing and experiencing as a Buddha does.

What’s needed by that, what I love about it is yes, it’s a far development to become fully enlightened, but actually we have that full enlightenment already in ourselves, right there hidden in our fingertips. But then we don’t pay attention, because we only think we have a “fingertip,” and we don’t get down to the cellular level of experience. We don’t want to let ourselves go into that.

We feel insecure when we don’t have a description and a narrative about what we’re doing that makes us feel it’s under our control. But the problem with keeping it under out control then is boring. It’s not fulfilling. It also it’s very, very partial.

You go to a concert, or you go to a museum, or you encounter an art object, or you have a personal experience, essential experience even and some of this says, “Well, how was that, or what happened to these things?” You say, “Well, I was really blown away,” you say. What means by blown away, of course in the gangster movie is that means killed. What gets killed or blown away is once fitting once experience into a set of preconceived concepts that actually don’t allow for that much ecstasy, or that much bliss, or that much self, losing yourself in something, where you feel – makes you feel really great and you really get it.

The goal is to be like that all the time. Not meaning that they’re like dead, then you’d be like a vegetable, you wouldn’t know what was going on and you would be just wondering around, lost in the universe without knowing who you were. No.

The good thing is where you completely are aware of the network, but you’re completely free of it at the same time. Although you can use it. That’s a great thing about this experiential thing being beyond our concept. It’s know this. Shelley said, “Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of mankind.” What he meant by that was that a poet sees something everybody else sees and fit into their preconceived idea. The poet sees something completely new and different, then articulates that in a poem, using some of the old concepts, but using them in a way that then the reader or the listener gets a hint of that new experience.

Then of course, that new experience then becomes a formula and a concept, which you then slap on the thing and it takes another part to come and break past that. What he meant by legislator, that they legislate the terms or more perception. The point is our habitually conceptually dominated perception is limited and it has value, of course, but it’s limited. The direct experience of things is where we go beyond that.
That’s where we – Buddha science really likes contemporary science, which is now just western of course, it’s worldwide. That they privilege the experience, which is the empirical experiment, like experience experiment and they privilege that over the theory. They say that theories are all just hypothetical accounting for previous experiences. If you have new data from new experiences and experiments, then you revise the theory.

Therefore, you don’t try to capture reality in some absolute dogma in theory. But of course, unfortunately do and they’re a particularly thing nowadays is the dogma of materialism that has no mind and no power of mind. That is self-defeating and self-limiting and unnecessary. I’m sure your audience in the topic just then shows that you’re aware of people who want to develop the mind, they want to know about mind over matter, they want to get their own minds in order and empower them and they should and they will and we have to, because it’s up to we individuals to straighten out this messed up society, planet, what have you. I won’t go into that.

One example though I like to give, because it’s my main topic nowadays is the Dalai Lama. People always wonder how he keeps up his joy, his good humor, his friendly presence and his own personal enjoyment of life, relish of life when he’s facing this empire that’s chasing him on the planet, that’s persecuting his people, that has for 60 years has been in exile and so forth, and they’ve been wrecking this country and harming his people?

He was fixing incident, he resisted. He hasn’t give into it, but he doesn’t let it destroy his daily existence and therefore, is more capable of resisting because he stays happy in spite of the adversity. How do you do that this is the direction we’re talking about? If you could do that, it seems like he can set an example for us to be able to do that like that, then we can certainly do it with whatever level of adversity we experience.

It makes you open. For example, say a bad thing happens to you in adversity and if you close on that with your concepts and your narrative about, “That’s a terrible adversity. That’s horrible, you know.” Then you’re just going to suffer. You will intensify the suffering that you already got from the adversary.

If you are more open, where what you experience will go ahead – the pay and dimension is more than whatever your identified pain is, and there is another side to it then you can find silver linings. You can make the best of it, then you can take advantage of it actually. You can use adversity to empower yourself for more success, but you can’t do that if you’re just wrapped one concept on it and get dogmatic about it and that’s it and close your mind around it.

All of the Buddha science, the masterful psychology they have for thousands of years is all about that the nature of life itself is blissful, is reality itself is something good. It’s nirvana actually. You don’t have to go off somewhere on icebox, or a vast empty space someplace for nirvana. This is nirvana. The more you’re open to reality, therefore the happier you are. The more closed you are and the more imposing of what your preconceived idea of reality is, whereas one that someone has brainwashed you into, the more miserable you will be. It’s generally the methodology, the art, the science of how to open the human mind and heart and have a happy loving life.

[0:37:53.5] MB: You’re probably listening to the show because you want to master new skills and abilities, so that you can live a rich and rewarding life. That’s why I’m excited to tell you once again about our amazing sponsor for this episode; Skillshare.

Skillshare is an online learning community with 16,000 courses in design, business and more. You can learn everything from logo design to social media marketing to street photography. You get unlimited access to all of the courses on Skillshare for a low monthly price. You never have to pay per course again.

They have several awesome courses on there that I personally love; everything from mastering Evernote to Mind Mapping to learning to draw, if you want to get a leg up in graphic design, social media marketing, culinary knife skills, or anything else, check out Skillshare.

Right now, they’re offering an incredible value to our listeners. You can get three months of Skillshare for 99 cents. All you have to do is go to skillshare.com/success. That’s skillshare.com/success and you can redeem three months of classes for just 99 cents.

[0:39:09.1] MB: This is a topic that fascinates me and I want to dig deeper into this. How does somebody like the Dalai Lama, mind this happiness and joy in a world that’s so full of suffering?

[0:39:17.7] RT: Well, somebody comes up and insults you. That’s bad, and you’re not happy and sorry that they felt that way. Then you will take note your inventory and you realize a lot of other people didn’t. You throw some awful stuff. Gandhi had a nice way of putting it that the Dalai Lama I know agrees with. Where he said, when something terrible happens and it’s very sad and there’s so many things he said today’s goods that are really sad. Yet, you reflect on the broader pattern of life.

If somebody killed somebody, that’s – or somebody had OD’d and died, but you didn’t think about people who didn’t hurt anybody else. Somebody who helped that old lady across the street, somebody helps somebody carry their package, somebody who returned a – the other day I lost my laptop in a cab. Mohammad brought it back and he didn’t even want a reward. We had to contact him. We had to tell him how to contact us. I didn’t have to find my Mac, which I hadn’t turned that on, but we did locate him finally and they told him where to bring it, and he just rushed right back with it.

Like a 3.5 grand laptop and he didn’t want a reward. I’ve seen things like – then somebody else stole stuff. I lost this. I got ripped off on that. A lot of people who did rip me off. In other words, the Dalai Lama counts his blessings. He doesn’t deny his sufferings and he resists and he speaks out and he fights, non-violently fights to try to right the wrongs. He’s very honest and can be very blunt and so forth and can be unpopular when he has to take a stand sometimes, but he counts his blessings.

He looks at a flower on his way to a meeting where he’s going to be told, “You can’t get a Visa to go see your old friend on his 80th birthday.” He then sees the flower and he realizes his friend is looking on a flower. In other words, you brought your attitude and your orientation and you don’t fixate on the bad things, but you don’t – and you do that without just trying to live in denial of them.

In other words, you embrace that they’re there and you resist that, and you also you even are motivated not to be only focused on the bad things, because you know if you do that, you will get bad and you will be totally ineffective doing anything about it.

As you know, when you’re miserable, you’re very ineffective in dealing with people or anything. When you’re really happy, not in a hysterical way, but in a zingy way, then you’re really skilled. You can help someone overcome a tantrum, a kid who is so focused because they want that candy bar and out the window you get them thinking about Big Bird or something, or is looking out the horse out there distracting him. You’re really skillful and humorous about it, because you feel good. You share your good feelings automatically.

Therefore, it isn’t just a selfish thing. It’s a motivation to resist the bad is to be happy about the good. Then they’ll make you better able to resist the bad, because you have stronger motivation and more skill.

When someone loses their temper, then psychological studies they lose – I don’t know how they came with that exact figure, but they say they lose 85% of their judgment about how to mend, or how to deal with the situation that they’re so mad about. They had that bull in China shop that crash into stuff, they break things, they say things they didn’t mean, they overdo it, they got a big out reaction to tell the person they were trying to do something with. That’s how he does it.

[0:42:33.5] MB: I think I’ve heard a similar anecdote about the Dalai Lama, but it reminds almost when you’re on an airplane and they say you have to put your own oxygen mask on first before you can help somebody else.

[0:42:43.4] RT: That’s right. That’s right. You got that. That’s a good one. That’s really good. Love is like that. You have to be happy yourself already to have genuine, according to Buddhist psychology, define love. Meaning, not that just possessive wish, but the wish for the happiness of the beloved. Because how can you wish for someone’s happiness if you have no touch with happiness yourself? In other words, “I want you to be happy, I’m so miserable.” No, that won’t work. Then say, “Well, thanks a lot. But that doesn’t make me happy.”

[0:43:15.9] MB: Another topic that I’m fascinated with is the relationship between, or the idea of the illusion that we’re our own isolated egos oppose the universe and the reality of the interconnectedness of everything.

[0:43:27.4] RT: Right, right. Well, that’s what you’re talking about there is the second noble truth, or second noble fact taught by the Buddha, which is the fundamental miswiring of a human, come from probably many previous existences as a lesser intelligent animal that I’m the only absolute thing around here. Other lives are – I could be in the matrix and they could just be illusions and I’m the only real one.

Therefore, most important to me and that’s the one that puts you in this hopeless situation of suffering, of frustration. Because nobody else will agree, universe doesn’t agree, not just people, but germs, heavy objects that falls down over mountainside, the earthquakes, fires, they all don’t agree that you’re the most important.

When you’re up against death, there is all that. As long as that’s your thing, you’re going to be miserable. That’s a second noble fact. That’s a far for a noble person, noble being defined by a more altruistic, more well-connected, more relativized person. But nirvana, the third noble truth is the fact that the universe is empty of any non-relational entity. There is no such entity that is relevant to the universe that is not related to it. That’s all that empty just means. Empty does not mean it’s faced like a nothing, that’s like space. Nothing is not a space either. Nothing is actually nothing.

Point is that Buddha’s discovery 2,500 years ago anticipated Mr. Einstein, Dr. Einstein’s one of one a century ago or so. That is that relativity, because the great teaching of emptiness itself is this is a teaching of relativity. It teaches that you are totally interrelated, I am totally interrelated. We are a nexus of interrelationship of all that’s around us, space and time and we are a work in progress, and that does not disable us from being – making ourselves best work we can, making ourselves a work of art.

Which is there is apparently no limit, because the unlimited work of art is Buddha actually. Buddha’s manifestations are a work of art, and we’re having life itself becomes art. Because it’s all related and so there is infinite energy to be drawn on, there is infinite opportunities, there is also a lot of negativities, but all the negativities are weaker than the opportunities, because the negativities come from living beings thinking they got to just get out from number one, and then therefore each of them only has one small master, which is themselves, their ego, their little ego.

Whereas, the more altruistic ones, the more enlightened ones, they are serving everybody else. They draw energy from the need of infinite number of others, not just their own needs. They’re much stronger in the long run. Even in the short run, if one understands the short run. That’s what I was like to say, Buddha turned the old adage of ignorant people on its head. Their old adage being ignorance is bliss, implying they don’t want to really know reality, because it would be too unpleasant.

In the Buddha’s case he says, “No. Ignorance is the cause of suffering and reality is bliss.” Therefore, when you understand reality, you will know your own bliss, which you already have. The final really weird one that I’m loving more and more is that since I still I’m not that blissful, I’m busy, busy, busy, but although I love it, I love being busy with bliss, but it’s still not that blissful, because I’m still stupid.

The point is that the bliss that I will eventually find of nirvana, which would be Buddhahood is my own bliss that I already have. It’s just that I have blocks in me from really knowing it. It’s not some remote thing, exotic thing I have to go to Mt. Everest to find. It is me. We’re made of it, and you too, we all are.

That’s really encouraging, I think actually. Rather than all these big put-outs. Reality sucks, you suck. There’s some guy outside, like a God or something, or at least minimally nothing that will anesthetic for you, is like space out in. Instead of all those put-downs is like, reality is bliss, you’re made of bliss, you have the intelligence to get rid of the walls and blocks between you and knowledge of yourself, your habitual identity and knowledge of yourself. It’s very cool. Be happy. How about it?

Now, you go to go.

[0:47:41.3] MB: Yeah, we’re out of time, but that remind me of one of the fundamental conclusions of modern physics essentially is the same idea that every single thing in the universe exists interdependent of everything else, and that you would completely inseparable. You can’t ever really see one thing, except as a connected or relationship in some former fashion to everything else that’s ever existed in space and time.

[0:48:06.0] RT: Absolutely. The false thing was to doing to run away from the inquisition in the church, which I applaud them doing. But still, the idea that all those relative things, the one thing that’s excluded is the mind of the living being. That’s unnecessary. The mind is just super subtle awareness, and actually it is that with which we can go beyond the way of particle paradox into the area of Heisenberg on certain the principle, into the plenum of infinite energy of the vacuum, where everything is happening, but where we can’t reach conceptually.

We can work on the surface with probabilities and statistics and invent wonderful magnificent things. But our mind is this one that is – can reach that completely, seemingly inaccessible, non-objective, Copenhagen interpretation in forced real, which is the constitutive realm of reality of infinite energy, with no need for any scarcity or deprivation of anybody.

They should get over not having that be part of their world. I love this when Henry Stapp, a great senior and magnificent quantum physics guy, who explained to me for finally for the first time I finally figured out what was wrong, why the whole science wasn’t brought back  into a thing of being accepting the presence of mind and nature by the Copenhagen declaration of Bohr and Heisenberg, because Einstein rebelled against it.

That’s not an innocent, as a harmful statement that God does not play dice with the universe. He harmed himself because he said he wouldn’t accept that there was a non-objective reality that was a deep energy level, but it was you can’t grab in there with any kind of observation, mechanical observation, because the observing act disturbs what you’re observing. The mind that observes is engaged with the object served. There is no absolute objectivity and theory can’t reach them.

He then freaked out about that and said, “I’m going to come up with a grand unified theory.” Ran back to Princeton, got  himself a big grant and never did come up with such a theory, because there is no need for that theory, because we rather need the experience. It’s waiting there for all the scientists to get it.

Actually, Dalai Lama had been a big help in having these dialogues with them, and without being too pushy about any spiritualist or religious business with them, and just talking with them on a rational scientific level. A number of them have really gotten into it beautifully. Richie David and these kind of people, they’re really great. I’m sure you have them on your show, or I should think so.

[0:50:39.7] MB: Well, Bob. This has been a fascinating conversation and there’s so many other avenues and roads and things that I want to dig into, but I know we’re out of time. For listeners who want to do some research, find you and what you do online, what is the best ways for them to find you?

[0:50:53.6] RT: Bobthurman.com. That’s www.bobthurman.com. There is like a 100 some podcast on that, and there is a lot of stuff there. Access to my books and the one I’m promoting nowadays is the Man of Peace, which is a illustrated novel biography of its own, the Dalai Lama 80 years of life. It’s like a giant comic book. It’s lot of fun.

He’s a new mutant actually. He hasn’t beaten the bad guys yet, but he will, because he’s doing non-violence and that will win over this ridiculous, self-defeating violence that no one can really use.

[0:51:29.7] MB: Well, Bob thank you so much for coming on the show, sharing all these wisdom, so many interesting insights. It was great to have you on here.

[0:51:35.3] RT: Thank you, Matt. I enjoyed talking with you and another time I’d be happy to, and I’ll try to be on time. Take care.

[0:51:41.4] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. We created this show to help you, our listeners master evidence-based growth. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an e-mail. My email is matt@successpodcast.com. That's M-A-T-T@successpodcast.com. I'd love to hear from you and I read and respond to every single listener e-mail. 

I’m going to give you three reasons why you should sign up for our e-mail list today by going to successpodcast.com and signing up right on the homepage. There’s some incredible stuff that’s only available to those on the e-mail list, so be sure to sign up. Including an exclusive curated weekly e-mail from us every single week called Mindset Monday, which is short, simple, filled with articles, stories, things that we found interesting and fascinating in the world of evidence-based growth in the last week.

Next, you're going to get an exclusive chance to shape the show, you can vote on guests, submitting your own personal questions that we’ll ask guests on air and much more. Lastly, you’re going to get a free guide we created based on listener demand, our most popular guide How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely for free, along with another surprise bonus guide by signing up and joining the e-mail list today.

Again, you can do that at successpodcast.com, sign up right at the homepage, or if you’re on the go, just text the word “smarter”, S-M-A-R-T-E-R  to the number 44222. 

Remember, the greatest compliment you can give us is referral to a friend either live or online. If you enjoyed this episode, please leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes, because that helps boost the algorithm that helps us move up the item’s rankings and helps more people discover The Science of Success. 

Don't forget, if you want to get all the incredible information we talked about in the show; links, transcripts, everything we discussed and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. You can get those at successpodcast.com, just hit the show notes button right at the top. 

Thanks again, and we'll see you on the next episode of The Science of Success.


December 28, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
Dr. Paul Zak-01.png

The Ancient Molecule You Can Use To Unlock Peak Performance with Dr. Paul Zak

November 02, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss the groundbreaking research behind the ancient molecule that fuels peak performance, the foundations of neuroeconomics, how our brains react during social interactions, we examine how our brains are designed to connect and built to work cooperatively, we dig into the power of oxytocin and how you can increase it in your life, and much more with Dr. Paul Zak.

Dr. Paul Zak is founding Director of the Center for Neuroeconomics Studies and Professor of Economics, Psychology, and Management at Claremont Graduate University. He was also among the team of scientists who were the first to use brain imaging to identify the role of oxytocin as a key driver of trust, love, and morality that distinguish our humanity. Paul is the author of the new book Trust Factor: The Science of Creating High-Performance Companies and has appeared on ABC World News, CNN, Fox Business, and more.

  • Paul founded the field of Neuroeconomics - what is that?

  • How are humans able to interact with total strangers when that is impossible in the animal kingdom?

  • How do our brains balance the risks of meeting a stranger vs the benefits of increased social influence?

  • Our brains live in this soup of chemicals, none of which we are aware of consciously

  • How Paul’s groundbreaking research transformed what scientists thought about the production of oxytocin and how humans build trust

  • Testosterone inhibits oxytocin synthesis

  • People are complicated, its important to have alot of acceptance

  • Oxytocin is an on/off switch

  • Paul challenges the listeners to a fight!

  • Our brains naturally help us adapt to the environment we are in

  • How do we get people in groups to perform at their highest level

  • How you can train your brain to release more oxytocin

  • Learn how to read the emotional state of the people around you

  • “All research is me-search”

  • How “listening with your eyes” can help boost your oxytocin and help you become more in sync with people

  • The “evil trick” you can use to get tons of information when you meet someone (it’s NOT what you expect!)

  • Our brains are designed to connect, we want to be connected. We are naturally open to touch. Our brains are built to work cooperatively.

  • Strategies you can use in your daily life to increase your oxytocin

  • How companies can measure and manage their culture for high trust and high performance

  • The 8 key building blocks leaders can use to build trust and improve high performance

  • Paul focuses on measuring brain activity and use that to solve real problems that humans have.

  • Its all about empowering humans to be their best selves

  • The neuroscience firmly demonstrates the power and vital importance of sleep

  • How you can implement concrete changes to get the biggest bang for your buck in building a culture of high performance

  • We trust people more who are their real, vulnerable, natural selves

  • Why you should replace “how was your weekend” with “hey you look really <insert emotion on their face>” to build deeper relationships

  • Almost no human can survive on their own - we only survive in groups - we must understand how to engage the groups that we are constantly around

  • Science predicts, and data strongly supports, that people want to be and enjoy being part of high performance groups

  • Relationships are super important

  • Why isn’t work an adventure? How can we make a work an adventure

  • Connecting, touching, giving a gift - give the gift of connection, empowerment, love, to someone around you

  • Effective social behaviors are rooted in SERVICE and serving others

iTunes Button.png
Stitcher Button.png
Android Button.png
YouTube.png

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SkillShare.png

This Episode of The Science of Success is brought to you by our partners at Skillshare! For a limited time, Skillshare is offering our listeners One Month of UNLIMITED ACCESS ABSOLUTELY FREE! Just go towww.skillshare.com/success to redeem your free unlimited month NOW!

Are you a professional looking to get a leg-up at work? Or just someone who just loves learning new things? Are you looking to do your job better?

Want to add some impressive skills to your resume? Skillshare is an online learning community with over sixteen thousand classes in design, business, and more. You can learn everything from logo design to social media marketing to street photography. Unlimited access to all of this for a low monthly price – never pay PER class again!

Again, Skillshare is giving our listeners a month of unlimited access - absolutely FREE! Go to
www.skillshare.com/success to redeem your free month!

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] Trust Factor: The Science of Creating High-Performance Companies by Paul J. Zak

  • [Book] The Moral Molecule: How Trust Works by Paul J. Zak

  • [Website] Ofactor

  • [Personal Site] Paul J. Zak

  • [Video] Paul Zak: Trust, morality - and oxytocin

  • [Video] TEDxAmsterdam 2012: Paul J Zak - The Biology of Good and Evil

  • [HBR Article] The Research Is Clear: Long Hours Backfire for People and for Companies by Sarah Green Carmichael

  • [Wiki Page] Peter Drucker

Episode Transcript


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success introducing your host, Matt Bodnar.

[0:00:11.8] MB: Welcome to the Science of Success; the number one evidence-based growth podcast on the internet with more than a million downloads and listeners in over a hundred countries. 

In this episode we discuss the groundbreaking research behind the ancient molecule that fuels peak performance, the foundations of the neuro-economics, how our brains react during social interactions. We examine how our brains are designed to connect and build to work cooperatively. We dig into the power of oxytocin and how you can increase it in your life, and much more with Dr. Paul Zak. 

I’m going to give you three reasons why you should join our email list today by going to successpodcast.com and signing up right on the homepage. First; you’re going to get an awesome free guide that we create based on listener demand. This is our most popular guide, it’s called How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely for free along with another sweet surprise bonus guide when you sign up today by joining the email list. 

Next, you’re going to get a curated weekly email from us every single Monday called Mindset Monday. Listeners have been absolutely loving this email. It’s simple, it’s short, it’s a few things every single week that we find interesting and exciting. 

Lastly, you’re going to get a listener exclusive chance to shape the show; vote on guests, vote on and submit questions to our guests. In fact, we’ve got an interview coming up this week where we had listeners submit questions, and we’re going to be asking those questions and calling specific listeners out that gave us those questions. You get to vote on new intro music, changing all kinds of pieces of the show. It’s an awesome chance to shape the podcast. So be sure to sign up for the email list. All three of those reasons are great reasons to join the emails today. Just go to successpodcast.com and signup right on the homepage, or just text the word “smarter" to the number 44222. That’s “smarter” to the number 44222.

In our previous episode, we discussed how to use mind control techniques to create any habit you want. Why we’re driven much more by pain than pleasure. We looked at the Hook Model for describing human behavior, talked about how to hack your reward to change your behavior, and the power of tiny amounts of friction and much more with our guest, Nir Eyal. If you want to hack your behavior to make or break any habit, listen to that episode. 

[0:02:30.8] MB: Today, we have another exciting guest on the show; Dr. Paul Zak. Paul is the founding director of the Center for Neuroecoomics Studies and a professor of economics, psychology and management at Claremont Graduate University. He was also among the team of scientists who are the first to use brain imaging to identify the role of oxytocin as they key driver of trust, love and morality that distinguishes our humanity. Paul is the author of the new book Trust Factor: The Science of Creating High Performance Companies and has appeared on ABC World News, CNN, Fox Business and more. 

Paul, welcome to the Science of Success. 

[0:03:04.4] PZ: Matt Bodnar, great to be on with you. 

[0:03:06.5] MB: We’re super excited to have you on today. For listeners who may not be familiar with you and your background, I’d love to go back and start with kind of your story and some of the early experiments that you did that really uncovered the power and the role of oxytocin. 

[0:03:22.5] PZ: Sure. I’m a very confused person. I have spent both the economics and neuroscience in both my training and my research help start this field called neuro-economics that we could talk about a bit. 

Anyway, one of the kind of deep questions that I’ve been studying for almost 20 years now is the role of interpersonal trust in explaining why countries perform better, why companies perform better, why individuals have more friends, are happier. As part of this quest, I was looking for a signal on the brain that would tell us essentially why we can live around strangers all the time. If we think of our closest genetic relatives; chimpanzees, they don’t like other members of their species they don’t know. 

I just came back to Atlanta a couple of days and I spent six hours on a metal tube with 150 other humans being dowsed around. You put chimpanzees on a metal tube, don’t even bounce them, put them in a metal tube and you see fur and blood to be all over the floor. How do we do that? How do we get a sense that you met wonderful human being, fun to hang out with you and your producer are often clearly a sketchy dude, don’t want to be around him. We have to have something in our heads that say, “Matt is safe. Austin, not so much.” Otherwise we can’t live in New York City or any big place we don’t know people all the time. 

Basically, the punch line is the secret to my success has been to read research and animals and figure out a way to apply that to human. We began running experiments in which we could have people share money with each other, and that money would grow if they shared it, but then they would lose control over it. Animals have been shown that when an animal encounters another member of a specie that it recognizes, usually by smell, think of this in a burrow. I ran into Matt in a burrow and I sniff and I can say, “Oh, that’s Matt. I know him. He’s awesome.” And so my brain makes this chemical oxytocin and it motivates me to affiliate with you so we can — I’d love to stay warm, we can protect each other, we can hangout, we can dig in the burrow, whatever we’re doing. Then if I smell an Austin coming in, then I’m like, “Oh, no! Fear response, aggression. I’ve got to battle this guy.”

It turns out that the same signal works in humans. In fact, it works in overdrive in humans that when someone intentionally trusts us or more generally shows us a kindness, our brain make this chemical, oxytocin, and it motivates us to invest effort into helping that person. 

If you think about this from an evolutionary perspective, the cost and benefit of being around strangers are not always clear. The cost of being around a stranger is that person might hurt me, might steal from me, could be dangerous, but the benefit is that I might find a project to do with him or her or I might be romantically attracted to that person or I might have that person join my circle of friends. 

Our brains are constantly balancing the benefits that come with building more social relationships with a cost of having the wrong person or people in those relationships. Oxytocin seems to be a key part of that signaling mechanism in the brain.  

[0:06:43.4] MB: I love the focus on looking at the animal kingdom and trying to understand how do these parallels play out in human behavior. One of the things that we talk about all the time on the show is how evolution has shaped the human brain, and it’s done a lot of good but it’s also baked in these cognitive biases and traps that we fall into. Tell me a little bit more about how that drove your research. 

[0:07:11.0] PZ: Yeah, I guess the major focus of my research in the last 20 years has been — I’ll just tell you that in a second, but I just had this socialization for talent development big HR meeting in Atlanta and I gave a keynote there and I started out by saying, “None of us will be ever out of a job, because the humans are complicated.” 

My talk was about how to understand some of that complication. By complicated I mean that if we run an experiment and we have people do a particular task and you put 20 people doing that task, you’ll get 15 different brain responses, not just behaviors, but brain response. 

As you sort of suggested, Matt, the selection pressure for higher cognitive abilities evolutionary has been very weak and so we see high variation in how people respond to different environments, and those manifest as cognitive biases, the use of heuristics. Our brains live in this super chemicals none of which we’re aware of consciously. 

A lot of the work we’ve done changes that chemical soup and then we can map out how that changes responses to a particular choice, and I do think choice is an interesting place to focus on because eventually all the information you take in — Not all of it, but a lot of it, boils down to doing something with it, which ends up being a choice. Much of my work has focused on where that variation in decisions comes from, and there are sort of trivial variations, male, female, young, old. There are also super interesting weird variations like I test you, Matt, today, and then I test you a week later to do the same thing and your brain and your behavior are totally different. I want to know why that’s the case. 

[0:09:05.3] MB: I think that’s another really important point, which is that this chemical soup as you called it or super chemicals is something that’s taking place in our brains that we are not consciously aware of. 

[0:09:16.4] PZ: Yet because our brains produce language, there’s this expectation that we have kind of insight into the brains inter-workings. In fact, what [inaudible 0:09:27.7] we always ask people, “Why do you do this? Do you think this was an interesting choice?” The whole reason we started measuring brain activity, honestly, was because people’s modal response to most experiment stimuli was, “Oh, I don’t know why I did this.” 

It’s pretty hard to build a theory of human behavior on I don’t know. Other than that it’s like having you eat a hamburger and saying — Asking your liver how it’s processing that beef. Your liver can’t tell you. Honestly, your brain can’t really tell you. I can force you to say something to me, because I know you can create some language. It doesn’t mean it has any insight into what is going on. 

Most of what your brain does, perhaps 99%, is in fact unconscious, and there’s a good reason for that that we could talk about. We’re not just aware of what we’re doing, and that’s okay. It just means that people are complicated. 

[0:10:21.0] MB: Let’s bring this back. Tell me about — You mentioned some of the early experiments that you did with trust and with money, what were the results of that and what did that teach you about Oxytocin? 

[0:10:33.1] PZ: Right. In humans prior to the experiments we started running around 2002, the brain was only known to make oxytocin when humans gave birth, breastfed or had sex. All three of those activities are way too messy for me to run in my lab. I don’t want to get involved. 

Based on the animal literature, we thought that if someone intentionally trusts you, your brain would produce oxytocin, maybe, and maybe that oxytocin would impact your behavior. In fact, that’s we found. We found that the more someone intentionally trusts you with money, but with other stuff we show subsequently, the more your brain produce oxytocin, which is a very rapid signal in the brain. It has about a three-minute half life, so it’s like a quick on and off switch. It says, “Oh, this guy is cool. He wants to play nice. I’ll make this chemical.” And oxytocin predicted how much money people would reciprocate to someone who trusted them. 

It’s not only that we respond to positive overtures from strangers. It’s that this chemical motivates us to engage with them in a cooperative way. I think of oxytocin as the biological basis for the golden rule. If you play nice with me, most of the time I’m going to play nice with you. Of course, most of the time is where the rubber hits the road. We spent about 10 years classifying the factors that inhibit or promote oxytocin release, and we really, really know this, because we also developed a way to shoot synthetic oxytocin into living human brains safely, and in that case we can erratically increase the amount of trust, generosity, cooperation that people have.  

[0:12:09.0] MB: Tell me about some of these factors that inhibit or promote oxytocin release. 

[0:12:13.4] PZ: Let’s talk about your producer, Austin. Why is he a sketchy guy? Because he’s a young alpha male. I’m looking at his picture right now. Look at that guy. He’s a specimen. He’s got a very high testosterone, and testosterone has been shown to inhibit oxytocin synthesis. Indeed, when we run experiments, when we give men synthetic oxytocin, we create a bunch of Austins, and sure enough they are more self-focused. They are more entitled. They demand more from others. They offer less to others. It’s all about them. 

I can tell you a nice evolutionary story on why between 15 to 25, young male should be aggressive and think only about themselves, but nonetheless that’s the factor. You have pretty reliable markers for testosterone levels, hairiness, deep voice, long chin, but we don’t know second to second how much testosterone is in our system, because like every other neuro-chemical system in the body, it’s adapting second by second to help us survive or reproduce. 

Other factors we find in women, estrogen levels which vary twice over the course of a month over a women’s menstrual cycle. Estrogen increases the uptake of oxytocin. For listeners who are female or who have girlfriends or wives, when you go to the movies with them and every once in a while for seemingly no reason they cry at the Bambi movie, they could be that they’re just more sensitive to oxytocin, which increases our sense of empathy and caring, and that may be driven by changes in estrogen levels. Progesterone, which increases when women are ovulating or pregnant, inhibits the action of oxytocin. High stress inhibits oxytocin release. 

Again, normally, I maybe want to affiliate and meet with Matt and hangout, but if I’m under high stress, then I’m in survival mode and I’m less interested in hanging out with new people and more interested in getting to the next 10 minutes. Anyway, whole variety of factors that we’ve been able to characterize, affect the way we are. Again, I may run into you down the street, Matt, and not know that you’re super stressed out and you treat me like a jerk and I say, “Oh! Matt’s a real jerk,” and what I didn’t know was that your dog just died or you just got in a car accident or something stressful really happened to you and you’re just having a bad day. 

I think for listeners, the punch line I’ve learned for doing this for 20 years is that not only are people are complicated, but it’s important to have a lot of acceptance for the degree of complication that the people around also aren’t even aware they’re giving off. We’re complicated and we’re unaware that we’re complicated. I think the only way to go through life is just to be accepting and just to say, “Hey, it’s not that Matt is a bad guy. He might have just had a bad day or a bad week, and that’s okay. I don’t want to rule him out from ever interacting with him. There’re maybe a lot of good things that I could do with Matt.” So I become much more accepting and tolerant of people around me. How about that? 

[0:15:23.5] MB: If I’m somebody that cries all the time at a movie, does that mean that I have a higher sensitivity to oxytocin or that I have higher sort of natural oxytocin levels? 

[0:15:33.1] PZ: Yeah. Oxytocin, it’s a really on-off switch, so it’s not a level of response. It’s a change from baseline. I’ll tell you something embarrassing about myself. I’m going to answer that question with a story. We’ve done a lot of work on persuasion and storytelling, and I know you’ve worked a lot in marketing, Matt, so we could talk about that. 

We started doing this work because I was on an airplane coming home from Washington, D.C., and my kids were little — I have two little girls, and I was tired and I couldn’t work, because it was turbulent. So I was watching The Million Dollar Baby, this Clint Eastwood movie, which I had never seen, and it’s a father-daughter story, has a very sad ending. The next thing I know, the guy next to me on the plane is poking me saying, “Sir, do you need some help. Is something wrong with you?” Not only was I crying, like every orifice in my face was shooting out goo. It was really embarrassing. 

When I got back to my lab, I mentioned that to some of the people I worked with, and I said, “You know, I was cognitively attacked. Maybe I was a little tired or lonely, but I knew I where I was. I knew this is a fictional story and yet I was so absorbed in that story that I couldn’t help but cry at the movies.” It turns out, since I had children, I become much more of a movie crier, and there’s a reason for that. As you age, your testosterone goes down, so the relative effect of oxytocin goes up. When you commit a relationship, your testosterone falls. When you have children, your testosterone falls. I don’t have data for this, but in my personal experience, if you have girl children, you pick out little dresses everyday of your life, your testosterone goes to zero. You become a big girly man. 

Again, there’s probably a good adaptive story evolutionary and why that’s the case. For the guys listening, if you’re in a relationship or have children or have girl children, don’t worry, all of us men have this high octane version of testosterone, which has the initials DHT. It has a long name behind it. DHT, you can turn on in a second. I’m making a joke, because I’m 6”4’, 205 , I’m not a girly man, but I am very sensitive now because I have kids. I wasn’t before I had kids. If you want to mix it up with me, I’m happy to do that. I can turn on the DHT like nobody’s business. Anyway, I’m kind of making jokes here. 

It does mean that our brains are helping us adapt to the environment we’re in, and the part of that is the social environment. Again, if you’re around children, if you’re around women and you need to be more sensitive, a lot more oxytocin and less sort of testosterone-driven, your brain will adapt to that. These systems are very adaptive even in adults, and so the more able you are to connect to people, the more you release oxytocin, the more you are in tune with the emotional state of people around you, which is also a very effective tool to have. 

I don’t know about you guys who are young, Matt and Austin, but when I was — Under 30, I couldn’t tell you the emotion of anybody around me. I didn’t really care. I was just like driving a thousand miles an hour in everything that I did. Now, I’m much more socially aware and I think that I’m a better social creature to people around me. Anyway, it’s a kill you can develop. If a big stupid jock like me can do it, then you guys can certainly can do it. 
 
[0:18:46.7] MB: I think you’re maybe the first guest to challenge the listeners to a fight, which I think is pretty funny. 

[0:18:52.7] PZ: I’m ready, man. Come on! I like, Matt, that you talk in your blog about performance. I think one of the most interesting things — I’m cutting you off. I’m sorry. I love high performance. I think that’s — The current work I’m doing is really focusing on how do we get people in groups to perform at their highest levels? I think it’s a really interesting and hard problem. I don’t know if you want to go there, but maybe that’s the pitch for why I’m still a — Like all of us who are men. We’re still kind of like 18-year-old doofusses, because we just want to do super cool stuff all the time, right? Let’s be honest. 

Women too, and a lot of women are really high performers. Sorry, I didn’t mean to be sexist there, but I don’t know. I can’t think of anything more interesting than knocking a baseball out of a park or jumping out of an airplane. I don’t know. I just love that stuff.  

[0:19:42.8] MB: I definitely want to dig into that. Before we do, I want to dig out a little bit more about oxytocin. Tell me what are some things — You mentioned kind of dosing people with oxytocin in your lab. What are some ways we can naturally increase our oxytocin levels. Is that something you would recommend, or would you even recommend potentially trying to take oxytocin?

[0:20:03.5] PZ: On the later, it’s a no. Oxytocin is a prescription drug. You cannot get it without a prescription from a physician. There are homeopathic versions sold on the internet, which are of course are just bogus. Don’t waste your money buying Liquid Trust or some other company that claims that there’s one part per bazillion of oxytocin. There’s nothing in there that have an effect. 

In fact, when we do experiments, we’d put about two teaspoons of oxytocin up your nose to get into your brain. It turns out the nose is a good portal to the brain for physiologic reasons. Two teaspoons of fluid up your nose is not really pleasant. Yeah. Really for research only. There have been a number of clinical trials that have looked at Oxytocin infusion for things like autism, schizophrenia and basically the effects are really, really mild, because the larger brain system that oxytocin activates is just regulated or damaged in these patients. 

Taking oxytocin, not a good idea, but training yourself, training your brain to release more of it, probably a good idea, because it will make you a better social creature, it will make you more empathic to people around you, which means you can read the key source of information, which is their emotional state. 

Again, when I was 18 or 30 or something, I wasn’t really good at reading people’s emotional states and I ran over people a lot. As you can tell, I talk fast, I have high energy, I move fast, and a lot of people, that’s not an effective to interact with them. Now that I’m a little older, and this saying in psychology that all research is me search, so maybe I had issues and that’s why I studied this chemical that makes us better social creatures. 

Now, I’m much more in tune with people around me — How they’re responding to me, how they are responding to the environment. I’ve trained myself to release more oxytocin, and I know that because I do a lot of experiments on myself, because I have a lab. 

Some things you can do are — Gosh! There’s so many that we’ve shown experimentally. One of my favorites is called listening with your eyes. I’m actually looking at your picture, Matt, even though we’re only on audio. When I’m talking, I’m actually making eye contact with you. Next time you’re with some friends or with your romantic partner, if you put down your phone, there are no screens in front of you and you gave that person in front of you your full attention. If you listen with your eyes, you’re giving this person the gift of being fully present in that conversation, and we’ve shown that when you do this, release oxytocin, that person becomes more in tune with you. 

Dogs actually do this to us. Dogs make eye gaze and cause our brains to make oxytocin. Other things you can do include things like touch. If people have ever seen my TED Talk, at the end of that I gave a person, the audience a hug. I got outed as a hugger, and now I just hug everybody. I go into a business meeting and if people want to shake hands, I say, “Hey, I hug everybody. I’m a connection guy.” 

Boy! People’s faces light up and all of the sudden I’ve got a ton of information from you. It’s almost an evil trick for listeners. If you hug somebody, you get smell information, you get touch information, you’ve invaded their space for 10 seconds or whatever, 5 seconds. It’s a great way to accelerate the connection that you’re trying to build somebody. What I do is I pre-announce. I just say I hug everybody. 

Maybe 1% of humans I’ve interacted with in the last seven years were refused a hug, because they’re socially anxious or they’re super old or whatever, but everybody else is happy to get a hug. Yeah, touch, really important. 

Sharing a meal, actually eating with another person will release oxytocin. There are tons of things. I will go through more, but I certainly have a top 20 list I can go through. 

[0:23:51.7] MB: No, I think those are some great resources. I love the evil trick of hugging people. I’ve even heard something sort of similar on a scaled on version, which is that you should never fist bump, you should always do a hand shake, because a handshake releases more oxytocin for both people and kind of forms a deeper connection. 

[0:24:08.3] PZ: I don’t think that’s even proved, but presumably. If you’re shaking my hand, I’m going to do a two hand and I’m going to pull you in anyways. Here’s the thing. It seems weird in a way like, “Oh, that’s just a funky, weird dude in California.” In fact, our brains are designed to connect. We want to be connected. We’re really open to touch. 

Like when you play sports when you’re younger, I think the only place you can hit a guy in the butt and not get punched in the face is on a sports field, right? There’s a sense of teamwork that goes into — Or team building that goes into touch. I want to just accelerate that process because, again, I’m interested in high performance and anything I can do, any hack I can use to get the people’s brains around me to connect better to me, it means we’re going to form a more effective team.  

[0:25:00.4] MB: Let’s dig into that now. Tell me what has your research uncovered around how we can build more high performance teams. 

[0:25:07.7] PZ: Yeah, the short back story on that, Matt, was that, as you know, we got kind of fair amount of media attention around this work on trust and oxytocin because it was brand new. No one had shown this before. We’ve got protocols to measure oxytocin in humans and, as I said, infuse into the brains. 

Eventually, companies started coming to my lab saying, “Hey, we think trust is important in our organization. Could you tell us how to build trust?” My first response, because I’m a nerd, was, “Yeah, we have this protocol. I can draw blood from your employees and I’ll measure their oxytocin,” and these executive’s faces turned white, they’re like, “There’s no way you can take blood from our employees.” Then I started thinking, “Gosh! If I’m such an expert on trust, how come I can’t advice companies on what they can do to build trust?” 

We started running experiments in my lab on teams. We eventually got permission to actually go in and take blood from companies like Zapos and Herman Miller and measure brain activity and measure productivity, innovation. We really got objective data on the conditions within organizations that allowed them to build trust, and we showed that high trust organization perform better using multiple measures. Then we went back and developed a tool and actually spun out a company called Ofactor so that companies can measure and manage their culture for high trust and high performance. Now we have a survey that identifies or both measures organizational trust and identifies these eight key building blocks that leaders can influence that create higher trust. 

The sort of punch line of that work is once I can measure trust within your organization, then you can manage it for high performance. If you can’t measure, you can’t manage. Because humans create culture whenever you put them in groups, if leaders on organizations don’t manage their cultures, those cultures are going to manage them. 

The humans are going to work out norms of behavior, and either you can let them go and just figure whatever it is it is, or you can manage that culture for high performance in a consistent way using the way our brains respond to each other. 

I think thinking about people that work as brains at work, embodied brains, in which our brains are built to work cooperatively, I want to use neuroscience again to optimize how I’m deploying resources and getting the most out of these individuals. It turns out that people want to perform in high levels, almost everybody, and if you put them in situation in which they can’t perform which they have the freedom to execute as they see fit when they get a lot of coaching so they can hit performance goals and then are recognized when they achieve those goals, people dig it and they perform better, they stay at their jobs longer, they’re happier, they’re healthier. That’s the work I’ve done in the last 8 years or so, and it’s fun for me because I get to work at scale now. 

The clinical work we’ve done is really exciting. It’s great to help patients, and it’s very rewarding, but if we go into a company and we change the work life for the better for 10,000 people or 20,000 people, that’s super exciting to me.  

[0:28:20.0] MB: I’m sure if you're listening to this show, you’re passionate about mastering new skills and abilities, and that's why I'm excited to tell you once again about our sponsor this week, Skillshare. Skillshare is an online learning community with over 16,000 classes in design, business and much more. You can learn everything from logo design, to social media marketing, to street photography, and you can get unlimited access to the entire catalog for a low monthly price so you don't have to pay per class like many other sites. 

They have some really cool courses on there. They have a course on Evernote mastery. You know how much I love Evernote. Evernote runs basically my entire life and I highly recommend using it as a tool, but also checking out their course on how to do it. They have a really cool course on productivity planning and they have a course on mind maps. Mind maps are awesome. I have a mind map sitting on my desk that I'm looking at right now for the Art of Learning, by Josh Waitzkin. I love my mind maps. It’s an incredible strategy that speaks directly to your brain and your subconscious and it's a really cool tool to remember things. 

There's so many fascinating courses on Skillshare, and the cool thing is they’ve been so kind to the show, they've been an incredible sponsor, and they're giving all of our listeners a free month of access, so get in there. You can get free classes for up to a month completely for free. You can check out all of these courses, just go to skillshare.com/success to redeem your free month. 

[0:29:48.0] MB: I love that point that our brains are designed to connect with each other and they’re built naturally to work cooperatively. 

[0:29:55.6] PZ: Yeah, and if we don’t inhibit that, it will happen. The question is it doesn’t happen in a way that is sustaining. It think if you remember like econ 101, we were sold this bill of goods from — I don’t know, like the 19th century or something that work provides this utility. The reason you have to pay for them at work, is because work sucks so much. But I know, Matt, that you dig what you do. I can tell, because I read your bio and we chatted beforehand. 

We’re recoding to Memorial Day. I’m all about doing cool stuff. I don’t care if it’s Memorial Day. I want to talk to you. I think it’s awesome. Why am I “working” on a holiday? Because it’s not work for me. It’s the coolest thing on the planet to measure brain activity, for me, to measure brain activity and use that to solve real problems that humans have. 

Yeah, if you understand that we’re set up to work in teams or we’ve done this for eons, don’t screw it up. Try to create an environment where people can really deploy that passion, that energy in an effective way. 

By the way, in my new book Trust Factor, as you mentioned, there’s a ton of ton of Peter Drucker in there. I was on a faculty with Peter Drucker at Claremont Graduate University for 10 years before he passed away, and Peter really influenced me, and Peter was all over this stuff, like in the 50s and 60s. It’s really about empowering the humans within an organization to be their best selves in groups, to get them stretch goals, to challenge them, go give them a chance to grow. 

There’s a ton of Drucker in the book as well and it’s just super practical. Every chapter ends with — In homage to Peter Drucker who famously said, “Don’t tell me what a great meeting you had. Tell me what you’re going to do differently on Monday.” 

I have a Monday morning list after every chapter. There’s a list of five things to do on Monday, and I say these are all experiments. No one knows for sure if these principles, even though they’ve been worked out in lots of different companies. They worked on my laboratory. If they work in any particular organization, because every organization had its own little weird quirks. They’re just experiments, and if you pitch it to people you work with and say, “You know what? I read this book.” We think it’s going to be awesome if we move to a four 10 hours a day instead of five eight-hour days. We’re going to try it for six months and see what you guys think and you give us feedback. If that helps marshal your energy so that you can do your other crap you need to do on a Friday or whenever and not take up a work, I want you to be all in. 

For example, I talk about this in the book, the importance of sleep is just really been shown clearly from a neurologic perspective. In a bunch of companies, you use something called firm 40. That is office opens at 8. At 5:05 the parking lot should be empty. I want you to be full bore for eight hours and then get the hell out and take a rest, see your family, go recreate, whatever you want to do, versus places I’ve worked, for example, where the boss is late for 8 p.m. Yeah, you screw around during the day, because you know you’re working a 12-hour day and you got to — Whatever, get your laundry or go on Facebook or whatever people do at work. 

I want people to be in 100% or as close to 100% as like Dan, and culture is a way to do that, to set up these normal norms where people are challenged and can respond with their best selves. 

[0:33:17.6] MB: There was a recent HBR article that talked about — I think it was something about how people who worked more than 40 hours a week actually started at some point to become less productive than people who just worked 40 hours, which I thought was really interesting. 

I also love your perspective as viewing everything as an experiment and just trying it out. I think that’s a great framework for implementing any change in your life and especially it changes in business, but I think that’s a really insightful way to view all of these potential strategies. 

[0:33:48.7] PZ: I think so, and I think if you’re honest with people that you work with — By the way, I don’t like the word worker or employee, I never that use that — Colleague or teammate. If you talk to your colleagues and say, “Hey, you know, we did this survey and we found that the culture isn’t as good as we like it to be, and we’re going to try a couple of new things for six months or 12 months as an experiment, but I think it’s going to be awesome for you guys. If it’s not, look, we’ll try something else. We just want to make your time here as engaging and as valuable to you as possible. If it’s valuable to you, it’s going to improve the performance of the company.” 

I have to suppress the name of this company, but we did a kickoff of a — Once you have the data, you can intervene. We’ve created culture interventions for companies to use and I did a kickoff at a company recently, and I was talking to the employees and I said, “Look, you may not think this is going to make your work-life better, but please give it a try. You’re going to get some little animated videos, we’re going to ask you some questions, we’re going to do this for 60 days, which is what about it takes to change a habit. 

It’s basically a habit change. It changes the way you interact with people at work. Guess what? If you actually try to change your behavior, it will improve your home life as well, because all these behaviors are good for all the humans around you. If you want to be happier at home, if you want your relationship, romantic relationship to be better, if you want your kids to be performing better and your workmates to be a more effective teammates to you, here are some behaviors you can do to make that happen. 

It’s got to be like a win-win space, right? If it’s like so many times at work, right? You know there’s some issue, they have to change something and employees get it right away. You want to pay me the same and get me to work harder. Doesn’t sound like a good win for anybody, but if we’re in this world in which labor does not provide this utility and which I have an integration with my work and life. I’m working from home, I’m working remotely, I’m doing stuff I think is super cool, I get choice over the kind of assignments I take. Then you can — If I’m a good leader, I can help to focus your energy and passion on stuff that you really enjoy doing. If you do that with a group of people that you rely on, that you could trust — Boom! Then you’re in high gear and it’s super exciting. 

[0:36:09.0] MB: Let’s dig in a little bit. I want to hear some of these building blocks. Tell me about the various different building blocks that you specifically recommend to kind of integrate trust into and help develop high performance. 

[0:36:21.9] PZ: Right. I’d be happy to. Somehow, Matt, as you know, magically they spell out the acronym OXYTOCIN. I don’t know how that happened, but I’ll list them and then I‘ll just discuss one or two briefly. The OXYTOCIN acronym stands for ovation, expectation, yield, transfer, openness, caring, invest and natural. 

Really quickly, ovation is recognizing the higher performance. Yield is crowd sourcing processes by delegating responsibility. I left out the E, sorry. The X is for expectation, which is designing challenges for people at work. The T is for transfer, which is enabling self-management. O is for openness, which is reducing stress by being clear about what the company is doing and why. C is for caring, which is intentionally building relationships with people at work. The I is for invest, which is helping colleagues grow personally and professionally, and the last letter, N, is for natural, which is being your authentic self at work and including being vulnerable.

Some of these things, people have happen to cross, because we’ve tried everything at work for the last 500 years, but what I like is that the neuroscience, my lab has done and other labs have done, show you how to implement these culture changes to get the biggest impact on branded behavior. Let’s take the first one, ovation. Recognizing high performance. Hey, that’s not new. Yeah. But what’s the science say about this? 

Recognition comes from peers when it’s close to when the goal is met, when it’s unexpected, when it’s tangible, when it’s public. All those things are reinforced the importance of achieving high performance within this community that we call work. When my community members go, “Matt! You killed it. You worked on this project for three months. Your team was just killing it. You thrilled the client. You hit these milestones, under budget, on time. Everybody is thrilled. We as a community want to recognize you, so we’re going to give your whole team a trip to Disney World. You guys are going to take three days off. We’re going to send you down to Orlando. Knock yourselves out. You just killed it an we’re thrilled to have you be part of our team.” 

Because the number of high performance in the world is in fact limited, I want the best people not only at my work, but performing at their best. Doing things like recognizing tangibly people who are just knocking it out of the park is the way to say, “It’s not about money. You got to pay people fairly for sure. It’s about doing stuff that’s super cool in a community that values that.” That’s just one example, and the book has many, many more examples for all these components on how to create really high engagement by essentially tapping in to intrinsic motivation.  


[0:39:14.1] MB: I’d love to dig into the power of vulnerability as well and hear some strategies you’d recommend for how to bring that into the workplace, or maybe how listeners could potentially bring that to a workplace even if they’re not necessarily a manager. 

[0:39:28.8] PZ: Yeah. All these applies to people at any level of the organization, from the lowest level, and in the book I spent a lot of time talking about how even entry level people at work can do amazing things with their work team and for the organization. 

The last component I call natural, which is just being yourself at work. If you have to put on some kind of mask that your work persona, that’s just extra wasted energy that doesn’t go into performing at the highest levels. It turns out, many experiments have shown, that people who come off as too perfect, too beautiful, we kind of hate those people. Yeah, I’m talking about Austin, again. 

If you show that you don’t know everything, if you ask for help from people around you, if you let your imperfections show, it turns out that induces oxytocin release, and people want to help you. 

If I said, “Look, Matt. We got this big project. Our client wants to do machine learning on this dataset we’re collecting for them. I read about machine learning. I don’t know how to do it, but I know you do. Can you help me out? I really need two weeks of your work life to do this machine learning thing and teach me about it. I want to learn from you. Even though I’m the boss, I don’t know how to do everything, for sure, that’s why we have an organization. That’s why people specialize.” 

Just being who you are, letting your work show, it’s okay. We actually trust people more who let their imperfection show. It’s okay to be imperfect and then ask for help. 

[0:41:02.0] MB: What’s another one of these that you think could be really relevant for our listeners and maybe something that — As a concrete, one of these strategies that they could really benefit from understanding?  

[0:41:12.5] PZ: I forgot one more. The caring component is straight down the trust building oxytocin runway. Sometimes, at least when I was in business school, they sort of had this implicit or explicit statement that fraternize with the people you work with, they will respect you. You don’t want to be friends with people at work. Again, our brains are built to form connections. 

If you’re at work and you’re forming connections, again, you’re inhibiting your national responses and you’re not going to be able to have strong relationships and count on people, trust people to do what you need them to do, particularly in crunch times. 

One way you can intentionally build relationships is to articulate the emotions you see in others. Normally, when you walk in at work you’ll say, “Hey, Matt. How are you?” “Good. How are you?” “Good.” I might go as far as to say, “How is your weekend?” “Oh, it was great. Fine. Whatever.” 

If you replace that hey what’s going on with the emotion you see in that person’s face, then you have a much different conversation. Matt walks from the office and I say, “Hey, Matt. You look tired, happy, sad, joyful, worried,” then we have all different conversations. “Why do you look so worried today?” “You know what? My wife has been really sick. We went to the doctor last week and it looks like it’s something really bad.” “Okay, let’s talk about that. How do we now modulate your work-life relationship? Do you need to be at work today? Should you take some time off? Is your team working effectively?” 

Once you actually can recognize the emotions in others and if you just articulate them, it’s like a booster to build relationships with them, and other things. Like in my lab I have a lot of graduate students, so I buy beer out of my own pocket every month. I think the beer budget is the best money I spend, because we have a nice patio behind our lab. You’re done with work and you want to have some bees and hangout with the people you work with, awesome. Build that relationship. 

[0:43:12.6] MB: I think it’s so vital and it underpins all of the research that you’ve worked on over the last — However long, 20 years or however long. I think that, just fundamentally, it’s about building relationships, and oxytocin underpins much of that, but at the end of the day if you care about people, if you invest in them and you really genuinely want to develop relationships with them, it yields tremendous benefits for yourself sort of at a biological neuro-chemical level, but also in the results in your life and in the results you see in your workplace as well. 

[0:43:50.3] PZ: Yeah, and I think Peter Drucker said that every knowledge worker, which to me is everybody now, needs to be their own CEO. If you’re your own CEO and I’m in an organization that treats me like crap, “Dude! I got skills. I can go elsewhere.” I’d rather have you have a lot of say over your career, to give you opportunities to grow, to have you be in a place that recognizes the amazing things that people do every day at work. Yeah, I want those people with me. 

I should say. I always keep my scientist head on, Matt. I’m always skeptical of anything I do, so that’s why I spent eight years doing this work before writing the book. We looked at all the business outcome measures we could capture, like energy at work and chronic stress and productivity and retention, all those things — Trust, substantially improves. 

Even objective measures like sick days or life satisfaction, the people who work in high trust organizations take fewer sick days and they’re more satisfied with their lives outside of work, because when you come home, instead of being beaten down by some — Sorry, bad word, asshole boss, you’ve been working with people who respect you, who value you, and if you’re something cool for the world at the same time, you’re energized when you come home. Yeah, you’re a nicer person to be around. That’s the world that we can create at work, which improves employees lives, improves organizational performance and really strengthens societies by focusing on relationships. 

[0:45:28.8] MB: We’ve touched on it, but we haven’t even really hammed home at this point, which the fundamental thing that underpins all of these high performance is trust itself. We’ve talked a little bit about and talked about a lot about oxytocin and how that helps build trust, but it’s really all about trust fundamentally. Once you’re able to cultivate that using these various strategies that you’ve recommended, that’s how you yield these incredible dividends.

[0:45:56.5] PZ: Yes and now. I want to push out a little further. I think it’s really about relationships. There’s almost all humans that can survive on their own. There must be some permit living in some mountain somewhere, but it’s extraordinarily rare. We only survive in groups. If we survive in groups, then we’ve got to understand how to engage the groups of people that we’re always around. We’re in many different groups over the course of our day or week or life. 

Again, I’m just a really super boring person and I just want to make the groups I’m in and my own performance better, because for some reason I’m obsessed with performance. The nice thing is the science predicts and our data strongly support that when you’re in a high performance group, you enjoy what you’re doing a hell of a lot more. A lot of focus on happiness at work and giving employees, I don’t, Taco Tuesdays or something, and that’s not what the science shows. It shows if you’re doing something important for the planet, we’re talking about purpose, if you know your organization’s purpose and you’re doing it with people that you trust and you can rely on that treat you well and you treat well, now you’re in high gear and now you are making a dent in the universe. It’s really that joy, that satisfaction of doing something important with people that you trust. It’s really about relationships. 

I think for guys in particular, we don’t spend a lot of time thinking about building relationships who are younger, partially because of testosterone, partially because we’re more aggressive than older guys are and then women are in general. I think this is a bit of a call to say that relationships matter a ton. I want the 3 a.m. friend. This is a guy that you can call up at 3 a.m. and say, “Don’t ask questions. Just bring a couple of shovels and supply. Something bad went down.” I want a couple of guys like that in my life who just they don’t ask, they just show up at 3 in the morning and help you fix some nasty problem. 

In the best case, I’m like a 3 a.m. employee. I’d like to have an employee not that I can call at my house at 3 a.m., but occasionally emails me at 3 a.m. going, “Hey, Paul. You know this problem we worked on for a month? It just came to me. I couldn’t sleep tonight. I fixed this damn thing that’s been bugging us that’s been holding down our performance.” 

You can’t pay people to do that. You have to love what you’re doing. You have to care about the people you do it with. Anyway, that’s my claim at least. Relationships matter. 

[0:48:33.9] MB: I love the phrase that you used. I forgot if it’s on the cover of the book or not, but why isn’t work an adventure. 

[0:48:40.7] PZ: Yeah. You know, we always adventures. Certainly, if you look at the way the world is evolving in terms of business, which is people will pay for experiences. I pay a lot of money for experiences. Why is that experience only for the customer? Why are the employees not having that experience? 

I think work should be an adventure. Not every second of the day maybe. There’s still some stuff. Still got to clean up the floors or whatever you got to do, but — I don’t know. What about you? Isn’t your work an adventure most of the time? 

[0:49:09.9] MB: Most definitely. Yeah, as you said, even adventures have boring parts potentially. Yeah, I try to make every single day an adventure. Absolutely. 

[0:49:19.0] PZ: And you can’t do that by yourself, because you got to work with a team. I think empowering the people around you to have cool ass adventures is — I don’t know, man. That’s a true leader, I think. When I’m helping the people around me be successful and allowing them to create adventures for themselves, what could be better than that?  

[0:49:42.4] MB: What would be kind of one piece of homework or actionable advice that you would give to somebody listening to this podcast that they could use to either implement some of the strategies that we’ve talked about to make their lives more of an adventure or to build trust relationships and develop kind of more oxytocin, I guess, in their lives? 

[0:50:05.0] PZ: It’s a broad question. I could do that. I work quite at home. Let’s do it at home. It holds over. Again, I don’t think there’s any — For most of us, there’s no hard line between work and home anyway. Oxytocin is a really, really interesting and ancient molecule and it’s very difficult or perhaps impossible to have make your brain make it yourself, but you can give that gift of oxytocin release to others by connecting to them, touching them, giving them a gift. Almost always when their brains make oxytocin, they want to reciprocate and give you the same thing. 

If we think about the best social behaviors, it’s really about giving the gift of connection, of empowerment, or love or whatever that person around you really needs. Think of this as effective social behaviors are surface behaviors. I want to serve the people around me. 

I try to end every conversation with the word service and I’ll do that with you, Matt. Matt, I want to be of service to you. It’s been an absolute pleasure talking to you, and I hope that we find a way to do something in the future, so I want to put myself out there and say when you’ve got an idea, when you’ve got a crazy neuroscience question, when something you’re doing, I want to continue to be of service to you. I think if I end every conversation with service that I want to engage with the people around me, and it turns out that if you serve other people, that comes back to you many fold. If it doesn’t, that’s okay, because I still feel good helping other people. 

Think about being of service to the people around you as supposed to what’s in it for me? Think about what I can do to make you happier, perform better. I don’t know. I think that’s a pretty good way to go through life.  

[0:51:53.2] MB: What a great idea and what a great framework, and I’m pretty sure I felt a little boost of oxytocin when you said that. 

[0:51:59.9] PZ: Bingo! We’re in good shape now. 

[0:52:01.5] MB: Exactly. It reminds me of the old — It’s probably before him, but Zig Ziglar, “You can have anything you want in life if you help enough other people get what they want.” 

[0:52:11.5] PZ: Man, it’s so true, isn’t it?

[0:52:13.0] MB: I’ll do a small act of service for you. For listeners who want to dig in more, where can they find you and find the book online?

[0:52:20.9] PZ: All your online sellers; Amazon, Kindle, Audible Habits, Trust Factor, the science of creating high performance companies, the company we’ve spun off to do that work is ofactor.com, O-F-A-C-T-O-R.com. Lots of free tools and assessments there that you can use, and you can find out more about me at pauljzac.com.

Reach out listeners. Let me know what I can do to help you. 

[0:52:47.7] MB: Paul, thank you so much for coming on the show, sharing all these incredible wisdom. Your work and research and fascinating and there are so many relevant conclusions for everybody, so thank you again. 

[0:52:59.6] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. We created this show to help you, our listeners, master evidence-based growth. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@successpodcast.com. That's matt@successpodcast.com. I'd love to hear from you and I read and respond to every single listener email. In fact I responded into a number of listener emails this morning from across the globe. 

I’m going to give you three reasons why you should join our email list today by going to successpodcast.com and signing up right on the homepage. First, you’re going to get exclusive curated weekly emails from us every single week, our Mindset Monday email, which listeners have been loving.

Next, you're getting a listener exclusive chance to shape the show, vote on guests, submit your own personal questions to our guests, vote on new intro music and all kinds of ways to interact with the show. Lastly, you’re going to get an awesome free guide that we created based on listener demand called How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely for free along with another surprise bonus guide which is equally as awesome by joining the email list. You can go to successpodcast.com, sign up right on the homepage, or if you’re on the go, if you’re on the move right now, just text the word “smarter" to the number 44222.

Remember, the greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes. That helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. 

Don't forget, if you want to get all the incredible information we talked about in this episode; links, transcripts, everything we talked about on the show and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. You can get them at successpodcast.com, just hit the show notes button right at the top. 

Thanks again, and we'll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success.


November 02, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
ChrisHadfield-01.png

How This Astronaut Survived Going Blind In Space & Tools for Crushing Fear with Chris Hadfield

October 19, 2017 by Lace Gilger in High Performance, Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss what happened when our guest astronaut Chris Hadfield went blind during a space walk - and how he made it out alive. We talk about the mental toughness necessary to survive extremely dangerous situations like that, discuss in depth how astronauts deal with fear, look at the vital importance of powerful training to deal with huge risks, and much more with  Chris Hadfield.

Chris Hadfield, who the BBC called “the most famous astronaut since Neil Armstrong" has been a part of several space missions with the Canadian Space Agency and NASA. He served as Chief of Robotics and Chief of International Space Station Operations. Chris was the first Canadian to command the International Space Station and was awarded the NASA Exceptional Service Medal and inducted to the Canadian Aviation Hall Of Fame. In addition to his work as an engineer and astronaut Chris is an author, musician, and speaker.

We discuss:

  • The 3 key things that enabled chris to make it all the way through the astronaut selection process

  • How Chris survived going BLIND during a space walk in outer space!!

  • How astronauts rescue incapacitated crew in outer space

  • How to cultivate the mental toughness to survive the most dangerous situations imaginable

  • The learned and trained ability to deal with extremely complex circumstances

  • Why Chris was an astronaut for 21 years and only spent 6 months in space, thats how important training is

  • In outer space, you can’t count on luck, you count on your own learned ability to deal with the probable things that could go wrong

  • How NASA develops training programs to do everything possible to be successful

  • The vital importance of visualizing failure and understanding what could go wrong

  • The importance of practicing the 10,000 things that could go wrong

  • Astronauts don’t visualize success, they practice for failure, all the time

  • Visualize failure, incrementally improve, don't count on luck

  • NASA’s Recipe for Success

  • The relationship between DANGER and FEAR

  • Things aren't’ scary, but people get scared

  • Things don’t change whether or not you are afraid of them - the ONLY question is whether or not you are prepared

  • Preparation is the antidote to fear, if you’re ready, you won’t be afraid

  • Your body’s physiology reacts to being unprepared to a dangers situation with a reaction we simply call “fear”

  • FEAR = LACK OF PREPARATION

  • Perpetual fear = STRESS (and overwhelm)

  • Ask yourself “what thing am I not prepared for that is causing me stress?"

  • Listen to fear, but don’t keep fear from allowing you to dictate your life

  • How do you change your own threshold of fear?

  • How to overcome your fear of spiders!

  • Recognize real threats through the noise of the non threats

  • if you dont know what to be afraid fo, then your afraid of everything

  • the difference between belief and knowledge

  • If you're afraid of a jaguar, should you be afraid of a kitten?

  • One of the ways to increase your own significance is to exaggerate your problems

  • Why the perception that the world is more dangerous now than ever is fundamentally flawed

  • "The Sky is Not The Limit"

  • Life is TOUGH and the earth is TOUGH - it’s been here for 4.5 billion years

  • The perspective of an astronaut viewing the entire world from above

  • The shared nature of human existence

  • Why Chris recommends that you should “aim to be a zero”

  • Take the time to get informed, understand what is happening, and then take action

  • The building is very seldom on fire, yet we always treat it like it is

  • In space, ”there is no problem so bad, that you can’t make it worse”

  • Don’t just accept your fear, understand WHY, dig in, and treat it clinically - whats the REAL danger, whats the REAL problem I’m trying to solve, how can I change who I am to solve that problem / challenge better, what skill am I lacking? Why am I allowing myself to be terrified?

  • How can I change myself to move beyond fear

  • Fear is a destructive long term solution to anything

iTunes Button.png
Stitcher Button.png
Android Button.png
YouTube.png

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SkillShare.jpg

This Episode of The Science of Success is brought to you by our partners at Skillshare! For a limited time, Skillshare is offering our listeners One Month of UNLIMITED ACCESS ABSOLUTELY FREE! Just go towww.skillshare.com/success to redeem your free unlimited month NOW!

Are you a professional looking to get a leg-up at work? Or just someone who just loves learning new things? Are you looking to do your job better? 
Want to add some impressive skills to your resume? Skillshare is an online learning community with over sixteen thousand classes in design, business, and more. You can learn everything from logo design to social media marketing to street photography. Unlimited access to all of this for a low monthly price – never pay PER class again!

Again, Skillshare is giving our listeners a month of unlimited access - absolutely FREE! Go to
www.skillshare.com/success to redeem your free month!

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Personal Site] Chris Hadfield

  • [Twitter] @Cmdr_Hadfield

Episode Transcript


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success introducing your host, Matt Bodnar.

[0:00:11.8] MB: Welcome to the Science of Success, the number one evidence-based growth podcast on the internet with more than a million downloads and listeners in over a hundred countries. 

In this episode we what happened when our guest, astronaut Chris Hadfield, went blind during a spacewalk and how he made it out alive. We talk about the mental toughness necessary to survive extremely dangerous situations just like that. We discuss in depth how astronauts deal with fear. We look at the vital importance of powerful training to deal with huge risks and much more with Chris Hatfield. 

I’m going to give you three reasons why you should join our email list today by going to successpodcast.com and signing up right on the homepage. First; you’re going to get an awesome free guide that we created based on listener demand. It’s our popular guide called How to Organize and Remember Everything, and you can get it completely for free along with another awesome bonus guide. That’s a surprise. You’re going to sign up to find out, by joining our email list. 

Second, you’re going to get curated weekly emails from us every week including our mindset Monday email, which listeners have been loving. It’s a short email that shares articles, stories and links of things that we found interesting in the last week. 

Lastly, you’re going to get listener exclusive content and a chance to shape the show, vote on guests, change our intro music, like when we rolled out our new intro a couple of weeks ago, and weigh in on many important things that are going on with the show. 

Again, join the email list today by going to successpodcast.com signing up right on the homepage, or if you’re on the go right now, you can just text the word “smarter”, that’s “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, that’s “smarter” to 44222.

In our previous episode we discussed how a neurologist’s perspective on your brain fundamentally ignores the health of the entire system. We talked about your gut biome’s role in depression, mood regulation and how the micro-biome controls your behavior and emotions. We ask why it is so hard for people to break negative eating habits, looked at the biochemistry of addiction, discuss the incredible importance of understanding your micro-biome and gut health and much more with Dr. Kulreet Chaudhary. If you want to get the neuroscience behind your gut in your micro-biome, listen to that episode. 

Now, for the interview. 

I want to make a quick note before we dive in. Chris had to dial in via phone, so the audio quality on this episode is a little bit rougher than some of our typical interviews. Remember, we are interviewing experts across the world, people in many different industries and in many cases, you know, astronauts like Chris are not professional podcasters. They don't have a professional recording set up. We do the best we can to try and deliver the highest quality audio possible, but I just wanted to give you heads up that the audio quality on this interview is not the best that we've done, but the conversation is amazing. I know you’re going to get a ton out of it, so let's dive right in. 

[0:03:15.7] MB: Today we have another incredible guest on the show, astronaut Chris Hatfield. Chris, who the BBC called the most famous astronaut since Neil Armstrong, has been part of several space missions with the Canadian Space Agency and NASA. He served as the Chief of Robotics and the Chief of International Space Station Operations. Chris was the first Canadian to command the International Space Station and was awarded the NASA Exceptional Service medal and inducted to the Canadian Aviation Hall of Fame. In addition, his work as an engineer and astronaut, Chris is an author, musician and speaker. 

Chris, welcome to the Science of Success. 

[0:03:50.4] CH: Thanks, Matt. It’s really nice to be joining you. That’s almost embarrassing to listen to all of that introduction, but thanks for mentioning everything. 

[0:03:57.0] MB: You had quite a storied career and some really, really fascinating experiences. I’d love to start out, for listeners who may not be familiar with you and some of your background, tell us how did you become an astronaut and what were you doing before that? 

[0:04:12.3] CH: The simple question, or I guess how to answer to your question is, I decided to be an astronaut when I was a kid and I started trying to turn myself into one starting at like 10 years old. I really had no idea, but I thought astronauts fly in space, so I’m going to learn to fly. Astronauts have to know how to operate complex machinery, so I’m going to become an engineer. I noticed that a lot of astronauts traditionally at the beginning were test pilots, so I thought I’m going to try and become a military test pilot and see if all that works or not, and if it doesn’t, that’s all still a bunch of interesting things to be a pilot and a test pilot and an engineer. That's the path I followed. 

I served 25 years in the Air Force and became a test pilot, actually even serving with the NAVY, U.S. NAVY as a test pilot. At the end of all of that, I even got a university degree in Tennessee, in fact. After all of that, I got selected as an astronaut and then served 21 years as an astronaut. 

[0:05:09.9] MB: That’s fascinating. Both of those things, how do you — I know it’s such a competitive and challenging field even just becoming a test pilot, let alone becoming an astronaut. What do you think enabled you to make your way through that incredibly difficult selection process? 

[0:05:28.4] CH: Three different things, Matt. I think let me get through all that. Number one was an unquenchable burning desire. You really, really have to want to do this just because there're so many dead ends and obstacles and unlikely opportunities. The second is a huge amount of work. I love work. I grew up on a farm work. I think work is interesting and productive and it gives me satisfaction. I think in addition to an unquenchable desire is also a big appetite for hard work. Then the third is luck. If I’ve been born 10 years prior, I couldn't have been an astronaut. It’s just timing, and health, and circumstance and such. There’s always going to be some luck involved. 

I think if you have a burning desire, you have a huge amount of ability to work at something and then accept that there's luck involved, that's not a bad recipe for no matter what you’re dreaming of doing. 

[0:06:21.3] MB: One of the most famous things that you're kind of known for is this infamous spacewalk that you talked about in your TED Talk. Could you share that story with the audience? 

[0:06:33.1] CH: Sure. I’ve done two spacewalks to help build things orbiting the earth. I helped build part of the International Space Station. Spacewalks are hard. They take many, many years of training, development, invention, practice, but even while they're happening, they’re physically very demanding and very technically complicated. Nothing like you see in the movies ever. But stuff goes wrong during spacewalks all the time naturally. We try and keep it safe, because your danger is very hard and, touch wood, we've never lost an astronaut during a spacewalk to this point, but we recognize the risk and the danger of them. 

During my first spacewalk there was contamination inside the suit that got into one of my eyes, sort of stopped it from working. Suddenly I couldn't see out of my left eye. I just kept working, because I figured well maybe it will clear and I couldn't do anything about it anyway. I couldn’t rub my eye or anything. It’s stuck inside a helmet. My eye was irritated enough by the contamination. It was tearing up, and without gravity, the tears don’t go anywhere. They just stay in your eyes like this big ball of contaminated saltwater and tear. 

Eventually, that ball of contamination got big enough that unfortunately it bridged to the side of my nose and flowed this little bubble of contaminated stuff flowed into my other eye and contaminated my other eye. So then both my eyes were contaminated and I was blinded during my first spacewalk. That was a difficult thing to deal with, being outside, holding on to the outside of the ship suddenly unable to see. 

I think if we hadn't practiced, if we’ve taken it lightly, if we hadn’t done all the work in advance, that would've been cripplingly scary and unsolvable. I was outside with a guy named Scott Parazynski, a classmate of mine, really competent fellow, and we practiced for years and years and help invent everything we’re going to do out there. One of the things we had practiced is just in the category of if one of us becomes unable for whatever reason. You might have a loss of communication, so your suit might short out or you might lose oxygen or you might have a leak in your suit or whatever. You might have a heart attack. Who knows? We call that incapacitated crew rescue. 

Scott and I had practiced that. In fact it's one of the things you have to qualify at in order to be trusted to do a spacewalk. In this case I was incapacitated to some degree. I could talk. I could think. I was still fine. I could communicate with everybody. I just couldn’t see. Without being able to see, you really can't do the job out there. I talked to everybody and we ended up realizing that it might be something pretty serious contaminating my suit, and so I opened up the purge valve. The in-consultation with mission control down in Houston opened up the purge valve on my suit to let the contaminated atmosphere around my head flush and squirt out into space and then tapping into my limited reserves of pressurized oxygen in the suit. Listening to the oxygen hiss out of my suit alone out of the universe, and the universe is kind of bit to re-pressurize with one oxygen tank. I knew I was going to lose at that eventually. 

What it did was it brought enough fresh oxygen, and therefore atmosphere into my suit, that it allowed the contamination to evaporate around my eyes and sort of build a crusty ring around my eyes, and my eyes continued tearing. After a while the contamination got dilute enough that I could see again and could get back to work and my eye stopped tearing. 

It turned out just to be the anti-fog that we used on the visor, sort of a mixture of oil and a harsh soap and it’s as if someone had just squirted oily harsh soap into your eye. Your eye doesn't work anymore. Nothing super technical, just a thing, but enough that it definitely upped the danger and decreased our chances of success. We practiced and prepared enough that the mission control allowed us to continue and finish the entire spacewalk actually and got everything done. Since then we've changed the anti-fog solution that we use, when in truth we use Johnson’s No More Tears now, which probably what we should use right from the get go. That little problem manifested itself into me being blind, alone, out of my very first spacewalk, pretty interesting place to be. 

[0:10:57.6] MB: What goes through your mind in that moment when you completely lose your vision and you’re floating in outer space? 

[0:11:06.1] CH: Well, in my case it was, number one, what caused it. I’m thinking, “Okay. What can be causing — What’s irritating my eyes? Why am I struck blind by this?” I’ve studied all of the stuff very carefully. I know how all of the systems in the suit work really well. I’m trying visualize through all of the schematics and chemistry and everything of what might be causing this problem. Two; frustration, because I'm not able to do the things that I’m there for. I’m supposed to be building this huge robot arm to Canada onto the outside of the spaceship and now I’m useless and just there hanging on waiting for this problem to clear. I’m kind of frustrated at this event. 

Then, three, having to tell Houston, because I know just what a grenade that's going to be at mission control to tell everybody down there that I’m blind. They just have a real serious problem to try and give me good advice on. I’m just thinking about all of those things. 

The real bottom line is am I okay or not? As soon as you established yourself that, “Okay. I’m breathing. I’m fine. The only thing is I can’t see. So what? If you close your eyes, you can't see.” It’s just a matter of just something to deal with. Not a problem I wanted to deal with, and hopefully nothing that’s going to strike me permanently blind, but still just one sense out of five that I lost and let's try and solve the problem. Let’s work the problem and get to the solution of that. Let’s not going to worry and panic and overdramatic about the thing. Let’s deal with it and move on. 

[0:12:33.7] MB: How do you cultivate the mental toughness to be in such an incredibly high stress situation and maintain that kind of calm presence of mind to be able to problem solve and work your way through it? 

[0:12:48.9] CH: That’s why NASA hire the astronauts that they do. NASA is currently going through an astronaut selection, and 18,000 people have applied for like 8 or 10 slots, 8 or 10 positions. If you have 18,000 people to choose from, you don't just choose people that are fit or you don't just choose people that have a certain type of university degree. You try and choose people that not only are fit and have a certain type university degree, but also have a proven ability to make good decisions under really complex and high-stakes situations. Who would you hire? You’ll hire test plots, because test pilots are used to balancing all of that stuff, a very dangerous job. Test pilots are killed all the time, because the job itself is dangerous. Also, have that a learned and trained ability to deal with huge number of factors simultaneously. You’re flying the airplane, you're testing something new, you're dealing with unexpected circumstances and you still, at the end of it, have to somehow get home and land. 

Or we hire medical doctors, and not just run-of-the-mill medical doctors, but as competent as possible, or we hire people who have ran large stage of life, or not only do they have all the raw material, but they have the proven ability to make good decisions, but the consequences really truly matter. When you never have enough information, you’ve shown that you are the type of person that can be trusted to make the right call and not just get all panicked. Then that’s how we do it; the right type of people chosen and then years and years of training and preparation and study. 

I was an astronaut for 21 years, and I was only in space for six months. For 20-1/2 years I was training and studying and preparing and helping to support and invent space flight. That’s how you deal with it. 

[0:14:40.5] MB: Wow! That ratio, it really demonstrates the point which I think is vital that training and practice is so important. Talk to me a little bit more about that and how critical that is. For somebody who's — I’m trying to draw this back to almost an actionable insight for someone who’s listening in. How vital is training and how can people integrate that lesson of how they can build toughness in their own lives?

[0:15:05.2] CH: I think a lot of people just count on good looks and charm and luck and such. If you do that, that’s fine. Sometimes it will work and sometimes it won't, and if the consequences are low, then so what? It’s no big deal. So this didn’t work out. If the consequences of what you’re trying to do are life and death and also it meant financial consequence, or if you get this wrong, that you have wasted an entire shuttle flight or you’ve ruined a piece of equipment that cost a lot of people a lot of money. We take it immensely seriously. 

If that’s the type of thing you're trying to accomplish, then you don't just count on random events. You don’t just count on luck. It changes your entire job. Your job is now to do everything that is possible prior to this event happening so that you could optimize your chances of success. To do that, you don't visualize success. You visualize failure. Like in the book, my first book, the Astronaut’s Guide to Life on Earth, what I call the power of negative thinking. There's not much point in just visualizing success, because if it happens it's great. If it doesn't, then visualizing it didn’t help. 

Visualizing failure serves you well. This is what I’m trying to accomplish. What is the most likely thing to go wrong and am I ready to face it, and how do I know? Let’s practice that thing going wrong and see if I can deal with it. If I can't, let’s practice it again and again and again until, “Okay. If that thing goes wrong, I now know how to deal with it, and then let’s move on to the next most probable thing to go wrong and let's practice that until we understand it and then the next and the next thing.” 

I don’t know. We practiced 10,000 different things, and that's what astronauts do for a living; visualize success. They practice for failure all the time. They live in a world of negative thinking, because then when something's coming along, like space fuck, and suddenly you’re struck blind. You’re like, “Okay. What’s really gone wrong here? What am I dealing with? What could have caused this? What are the impacts? What can I do next? What did we practice? What do we know about this and how can we improve it for the future?” It just changes what your role is. You don't count on luck. You count on your own learned and practiced ability to deal with the probable things that are going to go wrong, and that applies to everything. It applies to driving your car down the highway. 

Eventually in your life, Matt, driving down a road, you are going to have a tire go flat, but how many times have you practiced it? How many times have you actually look at your model of car, whether it's front-wheel-drive, all-wheel-drive, rear wheel drive. W type of steering do you have? What type of run flat tires do you have? All that information, you know in one minute you could look it up. What is the right thing to do if you’re going 60 down the highway and your front left tire blows? What should you do? It’s a thing that's going to happen sometime in your life and you can learn exactly what you're supposed to do in 10 minutes on the Internet and the next time you’re driving your car, you can practice it 10 times. Just say, “Okay. Right now my front left —” on some empty stretch of road while you’re just driving long anyway. “My front left tire just blew up. Okay. What are my actions? Do I break? Do I not break? Do I downshift? Do I go into neutral? What do I do? Do I go left? Do I go right?” Just practice it. After you've done it, looked it up and done it 10 times, then you just file that away inside yourself as, “Okay. this is one of the things I'm now ready for.” Astronauts treat everything, like that flat tire. That’s how we fly in space. 

[0:18:39.8] MB: It’s amazing that when you look across people who’ve been incredibly successful in various different disciplines. I’m thinking about Charlie Monger, Warren Buffett. The business partner, the cochairman of Berkshire Hathaway, a guy we talk about all the time on the show. I’m thinking about people like the ancient Stoics. They all have very, very similar lessons, which is this idea that it's not necessarily about focusing on and visualizing things can go right. It's about figuring out the most probable things that can go wrong and planning and optimizing and building a strategy so that you can minimize those things. 

[0:19:16.3] CH: Yeah. That’s the only way that NASA has been successful in putting people that are up on the space station right now and driving our probe through the plumes of Enceladus that are going around Saturn right now and flying out beyond Pluto and driving the probes around on Mars and all these stuff we’re doing. It is purely the results of setting ourselves a goal and then starting to visualize failure and then learning incrementally better and better, how to get closer and closer to what it is we’re dreaming of and not counting on luck. 

No astronaut launches for space with their fingers crossed. That's not how we deal with risk. That’s just not an actual way to step up to something, and anything we’re doing in life, the people that you just mentioned. They have a set of goals in life. Things that they value, things that they want to get done. Any of the choices that they make have risk. Whether it's personal, reputational, financial, life or death. Anything worth doing in life has risk. Then the real question is, “How are you changing who you are so that you have a better chance of succeeding when you’re faced that particular risk?” That's really the whole recipe for success in spaceflight and really, I think, in anything worthwhile in life. 

[0:20:35.8] MB: That brings up a couple of points that I want to dig into. One of them is the relationship between danger and fear. Being somebody who's been a test pilot, an astronaut, you’ve put yourself in some incredibly dangerous situations, I guess, by most people's estimations. How do you view the interaction between those two things and are they the same? 

[0:21:00.0] CH: People ask you all the time, “Was launch scary?” or “Boy! Doing a spacewalk, that must be scary.” I became aware years and years ago as a test pilot and then as an astronaut that things aren't scary, just people are scared and they’re fundamentally different. 

Some people are afraid of whatever; a mouse or some people aren’t. Some people are afraid of — I don’t know, marriage, and some people are afraid of flying. The thing doesn't change. The mouse doesn't change, whether you’re afraid of it or not, or the airplane or the idea of flight or whatever. The real question is, “What are you prepared for and what are you unprepared for?” 

If you're unprepared for something then, really, the only recourse that we have is to be afraid, because fear causes physiological changes in your body. When you’re afraid, your body changes; you shiver or the blood drains from some part of your body or adrenaline gets released into your veins. Your body recognizes that, “Holy cow! This guy isn't ready for the thing that's happening. This wildebeest that just jumped out of the woods at him, he wasn’t ready for that.” And so I need to change momentarily this person's physiology so that they could deal with it. We call that change of physiology fear, because it allows us maybe for a momentary period to be able to face up to a risk. You don't want to fly a spaceship just by using adrenaline in your veins. It’s harmful to your body, but also it’s transient. That's not exactly how we fly spaceships. It’s not relying on super quick muscle twitch and reaction. It relies on complex reasons, a practiced deep technical understanding of how to do things. 

You can draw the parallel to just about anything. I don’t know, learning to use a skateboard. First time you get on a skateboard, you're useless at it and you fall, and so you’re kind of a little bit scared getting on a skateboard at first when you're a kid or, even worse, as an adult, or you don’t have the skills yet and you have a pretty good chance of falling and least skin in your knee, if not breaking a leg or busting a tooth or something, because you are incompetent at it. 

If you spend a time and you turn your natural talent into a honed ability, if you practice skateboarding until you can get on one, not even think about it, and now you could start to do tricks and jumps and all the cool things that the good skateboarders can do, you get to a point where it is no longer scary at all. In fact it's just sort of freedom. It's a cool thing. The skateboard didn’t change. The skateboards exactly the same. The physics didn’t change. It’s just you that changed, and that’s the difference between fear and danger. Things aren't scary, just people are scared. The only reason you're scared is because you didn't do your homework, you didn't practice, you didn’t get ready. You’re just trying to count on luck to carry you through this thing. It will work for some things in life. 

I think that gives you then the choice of you can go through life afraid, and one of our ways of describing perpetual fear stress. You could be overwhelmed by it, but just pick off one thing at a time. What is the thing that I don't how to do that I wish I could that is causing me danger or causing me stress, and let’s try and get good at that today. Let’s spend the next hour getting good at that thing so I don't longer have to be afraid of that. Then let’s go on to the next thing and the thing after that and the thing after that. That’s how I trained as a pilot. I used to be a downhill ski racer as well, same thing. That’s how I t rained as a test pilot and that is the absolute essence of training to fly in space, is to recognize the difference between danger and fear and then use all the available time to be ready for the risk so that you optimize your chances of success. 

[0:25:05.7] MB: What a great point. I really, really like that idea, that fear is essentially lack of preparation. If you prepare enough, if you train enough, it's possible to overcome any fear. Really, in many ways, fear — The kind of logical conclusion of that, is that fear is simply a signal telling you that you need to do more preparation. 

[0:25:27.4] CH: Yeah, or don't do that thing. I’m afraid of heights. Just generically, I think everybody should be afraid of heights, because if you’re in a position where you can fall without any control, then you don’t have to fall for much higher than your own standing height do yourself damage. You can crack your skull just by falling from your own standing height. That’s kind of the limit of how tall evolution is allowed our bodies to be, because if you fall from any more of your own height, you did. 

If you're standing on the edge of a cliff and one tiny little random gust of wind or lack of attention will kill you, then your body should be screaming at you that this is not where you ought to be, and either anchor yourself to something or do something else, but don't put yourself at risk if there's no benefit to what you’re doing. 

If this is a thing you really want to do, if there’s some great benefit to it. This is accomplishing some goals for you, then that's a different set of circumstances and you need to build all the skills you have so that you won't fall. 

The raw idea of fear is really just trying to protect you against hurting yourself, against ending your life unnecessarily. So you should listen to fear, but you should not keep fear from allowing you to dictate the constraints of your life. If you can't, you should locate, “This is important to me, just because I'm afraid.” Well, the afraid part is just because I’m not good at this yet. Let’s start gaining skills so I can do this thing that’s important to me and not just spend my life being stressed and wringing my hands and crossing my fingers and being afraid. 

[0:26:57.9] MB: I’m sure if you're listening to this show, you’re passionate about mastering new skills and abilities, and that's why I'm excited to tell you once again about our sponsor this week, Skillshare. Skillsshare is an online learning community with over 16,000 classes in design, business and much more. You can learn everything from logo design, to social media marketing, to street photography, and you can get unlimited access to the entire catalog for low monthly price so you don't have to pay per class like many other sites. 

They have some really cool courses on there. They have a course on Evernote mastery. You know how much I love Evernote. Evernote runs basically my entire life and I highly recommend using it as a tool, but also checking out their course on how to do it. They have a really cool course on productivity planning and they have a course on mind maps. Mind maps are awesome. I have a mind map sitting on my desk that I'm looking at right now for the Art of Learning, by Josh Waitzkin. I love my mind maps. It’s an incredible strategy that speaks directly to your brain and your subconscious and it's a really cool tool to remember things. 

There's so many fascinating courses on Skillshare, and the cool thing is they’ve been so kind to the show, they've been an incredible sponsor, and they're giving all of our listeners a free month of access, so get in there. You can get free classes for up to a month completely for free. You can check out all of these courses, just go to skillshare.com/success to redeem your free month. 

[0:28:25.7] MB: Another example that you’ve shared around this is the idea of dealing with spiders or fear of spiders and walking through spider webs. Can you share that example? 

[0:28:34.2] CH: what I was trying to explain to folks how is it you can change your own threshold of fear. One of the examples that occurred to me was spiders, because a lot of people are afraid of spiders and there’s a good reason for that, of course, and that some spiders are quite venomous. The venom that they have has a really nasty negative effect and there are some that are really awful that can cause — That’s a neurotoxin or cause really bad damage to the human bodies. Black widow has a certain reputation or a brown recluse. They’ve even got bad names. 

Of course, most spiders are fine. Almost every spider on earth is just a little bug and it’s just being a spider and it’s terrified of you because you’re huge and can squish it any moment. If you have no understanding of spiders at all, then you could treat every single little thing in the corner of your eye that might turn out to be a spider as the most venomous spider that exists, and some people do. They treat every single little bug that they see as potential death, and that’s unreasonable, of course, because the odds of actually running into one of those spiders that does you harm is really low. Rather than spending your life screaming and running every time you see a bug, why not say, “Okay. Some spiders are bad for me, but most aren’t. Where I live, how many spiders are actually poisonous or venomous? How many actually do me harm? 

For a lot of the places in the world, you’ll find that the answer is none. There are spiders at all that exist where you live that are venomous, or maybe there’ just one or two, and you could look up where they actually exist. Maybe they’re only in a certain type of cave or at a certain type of circumstances and maybe they’re easily identifiable. Like a black widow has a great big red hourglass on its back. It couldn’t have a clear, like a danger marking on it just to let you know. 

Then say, “Okay. Now I know what the actual danger is. If it's just any other type of spider, I can treat it like a ladybug. It’s got the same threat to me as a ladybug, but there's a couple of spiders I have to watch out for, or this type, and what do their nest look like, and I won’t walk into one of those type of webs, like the small web, like a black widow that build close to the ground, often dark corners.” 

Then say, “Okay. Now I know what the risk is, but I still have this fundamental sort of gut reaction, my instinctive reaction of fear. Every time I feel a spider web on my face walking in the dusk, I feel that same raw animal fear.” Then say to yourself, “But that can’t be a venomous spider. They don’t build spider webs up here. That can't be it. So I'm just being silly.” 

To overcome it, what I recommend is walk-through spider webs deliberately. Find a spider web that you know actually isn't a threat and walk through it and then find another one and walk-through that. Go up to an attic where there’s a whole bunch of spider webs that are obviously not any sort of threat and just walk through to them. Get over your primitive, illogical, instinctive, fearful reaction and actually look into the information. Find out — Use your brain and figure it out and practice and practice and practice. After you walked through a hundred spider webs with no consequence, then you could start to change your fundamental instinctive reaction. You can start to control your own instinctive fear, and now you can make your decisions based on reality and not just on the same amount of intellect that a simplest forms of life put into their decision-making. 

We treat everything like that in the space business. How does this spider web, or how does this spider actually shape up as a threat? What’s the real threat? What is the real threat look like? How am I going to recognize the real threat from all the noise of the non-threats so that I don't overreact, because if you don't know what to be afraid of, then you're afraid of everything, and I don't think that’s a useful way to go through life. I just think it’s self-destructive. 

[0:32:47.6] MB: I love the example of forcing yourself to walk through spider webs, and I wanted to hear the story, because, to me, I personally am kind of afraid of spiders and so it was very relevant story. I almost instinctively hear, and maybe this is just a lack of knowledge, but I sort of instinctively hear myself saying like, “Yeah. That sounds like a great idea to go walk through some spider webs, but what if?” I think it's the what if that always gets me and like makes me more fearful. It’s like, “What if that web that I happened to walk through happens to be a dangerous spider?”

[0:33:20.4] CH: Right. That’s where your intellect comes into effect, and actually look and do the work in advance. Don't just count on randomness. If you are afraid of jaguars, that doesn't mean you need to be afraid of kittens, house cat kittens, but they’re both cats. You can spend your entire life terrified of kittens because you’re also afraid of jaguars, but it doesn’t make any sense. Yet, for whatever reason, you’re going to put spiders in the same category 

Just do the work in advance. If you have no information, then you have to assume the worst, but you have your whole life to gather information, so why not do it? Why just assume the worst all the time? 

[0:34:04.4] MB: The cat and the kitty jaguar example definitely brings that into light and shows sort of how ridiculous that framework of belief is. 

[0:34:12.0] CH: Yeah. It’s the difference between belief and knowledge. If you’re just running around instinctively reacting on belief, that you may as well be a pug. I have a pug. He’s a delightful dog, but he’s not a deep thinker and he just deals with stuff the best he can and just instinctively reacts to everything, but we’re not pugs. We are the most rational of all beings, and what do you choose to do with your ability to think I think has a big effect on what happens in your life. 

[0:34:42.7] MB: That kind of makes me think we’re transitioning a little bit into another thing that you’ve talked about which I fully agree with is this idea that dovetailing that concept of risk and danger, the Idea that most people's perception of how dangerous their lives are is actually totally disconnected from the reality that today we live in the safest, healthiest period ever in human history and the world is actually a much better place than people realize. 

[0:35:14.1] CH: Absolute. Everybody wants to feel significant, of course. It’s a fundamental human natural need, and that's good, and you should recognize that you are no different than everybody else. You want to feel worthwhile and significant. 

One of the ways to increase your own significance is to exaggerate the problems that exist. The people that hold up the sign the end of the world is coming, it's because the world has been here for 4-1/2 billion years and this person has painted a sign and stuck it up here in there, particular 75 years on earth, because they want this to be the most significant 75 years out of all the 4-1/2 billion, because it makes them feel good, but it’s kind of ridiculous. The world isn't about to suddenly end just because this person held up a sign. 

I think that natural lack of temporal perspective of yourself and the desire to feel significant tends to let you over exaggerate the risks that exist in your life. I never been harder to whatever, to raise children or to do anything, it’s never been harder than it is now. Boy! You shouldn’t have to go very far back in human history to find examples that counter that argument. Like gosh, the 400 million people died of smallpox in the last century, which is the population of Europe, or the number of people that were killed in World War I and how, or the influenza epidemic of 1919-1920 that killed millions and hundreds of millions of people around the world, or whatever, child disease. The number of people that make at their full natural lifespan now is higher than it's ever been for our species worldwide. The opportunity just in the cellphone you hold in your hand, you have the library of Alexandria. Some total of human knowledge available to you and we’ve eliminated a lot of the diseases that used to plague us all the time. 

Yeah, life isn't easy, but I think in an effort to sometimes — I don’t know, feel a little more significant, we tend to over exaggerate the problems that face us right now. Looking back into history of studying the problems that our predecessors faced, hopefully the helps put us into a little clearer image in the mirror. 

[0:37:29.1] MB: In many ways, it’s almost the same lesson, which is the idea that the more informed you are, the more you understand how reality really is, the less fear you have about sort of vague things that are out there that people are worried about and afraid of. 

[0:37:44.7] CH: Yeah, I think so. People say often to me, “Gosh! Would you take a one-way trip to Mars?” I sort of remind myself all the time that, “Hey, we’re all in a one-way trip,” that you can't get away from that. You get your years of then life is done. Get over that part. Don't pretend that you’re going to be the first person ever to never die. 

The real focus then is not to prolong some vestige of life for as desperately long as possible, but actually to do things that are important to you while you are alive. That's the real key. What is important to me and what should I be working on? Because there’s a randomness to life, and what should I be working on? How should I be trying to change who I am? What are the things that I love and that I want to do and that I hope to get done? Let's work on those and not just spend my life cowering under the pillows and hope that somehow that will extend my life by one more day. Deal with the difference between fear and danger and recognize that you are kind of the thinking link between those two so that one doesn't need to overpower the other. 

[0:38:56.0] MB: Let’s change directions. I want to talk about another kind of quote or idea that you’ve shared, which is the idea that the sky is not the limit. 

[0:39:03.5] CH: Yeah, I think it's funny when you see some advertising campaign and somebody says the sky's the limit. I’m going, “Wow! Have you ever looked through a telescope? Have you ever gone outside at night?” I’m just thinking, “What a funny phrase? The sky is the limit.” Maybe that made sense before the Wright Brothers got flagged at Kitty Hawk or before Yeager went through the speed of sound during, whatever, ’47, or Al Shepard flew in space in ’61, or Neil and Buzz walked to the moon and ’69, or Peggy, who’s commanding the space station right now when she did — This is her second time commanding the International Space Station. The sky is this ghostly reflection of light that is the tiniest of vestige of onionskin tin sheaf around the hard rock of our planet. That’s what the sky is. To think that sky is the limit, it just makes me laugh. 

[0:39:59.3] MB: I think that kind of hints at the — One of the things that I've heard a lot of astronauts talk about is this idea that viewing the earth from outer space fundamentally shifts your perspective and gives you a much deeper understanding of the shared journey that humanity is on and the fragileness of earth. Can you tell me a little bit about that experience and what that was like? 

[0:40:25.5] CH: Sure. Earth is incredibly tough. Earth has been here 4-1/2 billion year, which is an almost — It’s such a big number. It's almost infinity, 4-1/2 billion years, and we’ve recently found fossils on earth from 4 billion years ago, the earliest of the two worms that were growing at the rift at the bottom of the oceans. There's been life on earth for 4 billion years. Life tough and the earth is tough, but certain little styles of living. They’re transient, of course. They’re fragile, and the earth gets hit by big events, huge electromagnetic pulses from the sun and other stars and huge million year-long volcanic eruptions and caldera and asteroid impacts and stuff. The earth is tough. It withstood all of those. 

Life is precious, and the earth, as far as we can tell, is the only place that life exists so far. We haven’t found life anywhere else. There's lots of probabilities out there, but we have found no evidence of life anywhere except on earth so far, and we’re looking. Maybe we will find it, but we haven’t found it yet. I think you need to balance those when you’re onboard a spaceship and going around the world in 90 minutes. You can see the rugged, self-repairing, ancient nature of the world. You can see the onslaught of life and the flow of it and the undeniable rejuvenated nature of it, because you go from 56 north to 56 south and you see the whole planet has — Or our orbit is tipped from the equator. You get to really truly understand the world without anybody telling you what to think. You just actually get to see it. 

The common shared way that we set up towns and villages and cities. It doesn't matter whether you’re over Timbuktu or Timmons, or Phoenix, or London. It doesn't matter. That pattern of how we choose to live as people is the same worldwide. Our common goals, we have different cultures and languages and histories and religions and beliefs, but the stuff that is common to us way outweighs the stuff that is different amongst us. We tend to exaggerate the differences naturally enough. It’s just human nature, but I think orbiting the world, you are very much struck by the shared nature of human existence and the commonality of it and the transient nature of it, but also the necessity to cherish it. All of those part of being one of the human beings that gets a chance to orbit the world. 

Also, the reason you mentioned at the outset that I’m an author and a speaker and such is not squander that experience to let people see it as clearly as possible. To try and express it through words or images or music or whatever, to let people truly see where we live and the fact that we’re all breathing out of the same bubble. I think those perspectives are fairly new to us as a species. It’s the result of our new technology that allows us to see ourselves that way and what we do with that information I think is important. 

[0:43:49.1] MB: Another idea that you’ve shared is the concept of aiming to be a zero. Can you tell me about that? 

[0:43:55.4] CH: When I was a young man, I, of course, was very confident. Like a lot of young men, that’s sort of bravado and feeling of invincibility, and I was a downhill ski racer and a pilot and becoming a fighter pilot, and so you sort of become over-sure of your own decision-making ability and your own ability to do the right thing. Of course, you're nowhere near perfect and you make some good decisions and you make some bad ones, but you only see the world through your own eyes and sometimes it gets pretty distorted. 

I found the natural thing to do is, especially when younger, was to assume that no matter what I decided, it was probably right. The way I tried to explain it to myself was no matter what I do, I’m going to be a positive influence. If I come in to a situation and I look around and a bunch of people are doing stuff, what they really need is me to tell them what to do, or at least to express my opinion. That'll sort everything out. 

If I can be a positive, I called myself — Like I’m a plus one. No matter what I do, I come in as a positive plus one influence. Of course, if you're coming into a complicated situation that's been going on for a while, there are all sorts of subtle influences and factors and history and things that are going on that you’re unaware of and you’ll come blundering in with some ideal that just occurred to you as if you're the only person that could have thought of that idea, and everybody around you recognize that you’re not a positive. You’re a negative. You’re a minus one, and everybody around you immediately says, “Wow! I’ll wait till this guy leaves, because what an idiot.” 

I tried to be slightly more realistic in my own abilities and instead of just assuming I was a plus one, and inevitably under a lot of complex circumstances in effect being a minus one, I tried to do instead come in to a new situation deliberately saying, “Okay. I’m going to aim initially to be a zero here.” I’m just going to aim to actually not cause harm. To try and give myself time to notice what’s actually happening, to become informed, to become sensitive to the subtleties that actually dictate what's happening here, and then be a lot more selective and deliberate in how I'm going to try and be a plus one and be a positive influence. 

There are lots of times that won’t work. The classic example is if the building is on fire, it's not time for a nuanced interpretation of what needs to be done. You need to take action. Is something bad is happening, then you don't have time for consultation. You just have to go with everything you’ve learned to that point of take action and do your absolute best to be a plus one. But the building is very seldom on fire and yet we often treat it like it always is. 

I think it's good to have a bunch of tricks up your sleeve, but you are better served in life to come into a new situation deliberately targeting yourself as a zero than just assuming that you’re going to be a plus one. I think it'll serve you better, but it will also serve the environment around you a lot better. 

[0:47:02.0] MB: What is one piece of homework that you would give for somebody listening to this conversation that they could do to concretely implement some of the ideas that we’ve talked about today? 

[0:47:12.7] CH: Two things. One is find something that you’re really interested in, that you're passionate about, that expires you, that raises your pulse just to think about it, that makes you want to know more, and start using your free time to become more expert in that area. Actually, if you’re interested in — It doesn't matter what. If you're interested in — I don't know, trees. It doesn’t matter. Spend some time actually studying it, learn about it, become expert in one part of it and then another part of it. Start making expertise in the areas that you’re interested in part of who you are. Try and really tap into what naturally motivates you and then allow yourself the privilege of becoming expert and competent in the areas that motivate you. I think that will serve you well no matter what. 

The other is have a look at what it is that makes you fearful and don't just accept the fear, but actually say, “Why does that make — I could tell when I'm feeling fearful. That unsettled feeling in my gut, that I can feel the cleanliness of my skin. That makes me afraid just to deal with that.” Then start to treat it clinically. What is it about that that actually is the danger? What is the real problem that I'm trying to solve? How can I change who I am so that I could deal with that problem better? What skill am I lacking? Why am I allowing myself just to be a terrified little chihuahua here when I’m a functioning homo-sapiens? How can I change who I am so that I’m not just relying on fear to deal with that facet of my life? Because fear to me this is a destructive long-term solution to anything. It’s okay in the short term, but you don’t want to have that the way that you deal with something in life. 

I think if you balance those two things, that's probably enough homework for today. 

[0:49:10.0] MB: Chris, where can listeners find you and your books online? 

[0:49:14.7] CH: The books, of course, are available everywhere, any of the online booksellers; Amazon or something. They can go to chrishadfield.ca, Chris Hadfield, chrishadfield.ca, and all of the stuff is available there. Then there're all sorts of stuff available online as well. I perform music with symphonies and have various music available and ideas and the books. Then I speak all over the world. If you go to chrishadfield.ca, you can look under events and see where and when I’m going to be speaking somewhere nearby. Yeah, it’s a world of information and relatively easy to access, but I think you can just Google under my name, then that's probably the best place to start. 

[0:49:57.4] MB: Chris, thank you so much for coming on the show, sharing your incredible story and all of your wisdom, so many great lessons for the audience. Really, thank you very much. 

[0:50:06.7] CH: It was a pleasure to talk with you, and I look forward to seeing you in person. 

[0:50:10.2] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. We created this show to help you, our listeners, master evidence-based growth. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@successpodcast.com. That's matt@successpodcast.com. I'd love to hear from you and I read and respond to every single listener email. In fact I responded into a number of listener emails this morning from across the globe. 

I’m going to give you three reasons why you should join our email list today by going to successpodcast.com and signing up right on the homepage. First, you’re going to get our exclusive Mindset Monday email. This is something that listeners have been loving. It's short, simple links, stories, articles, things that have us excited in the last week. Next, you’re going to get a chance to shape the show, vote on guests, change the intro music like we rolled out a couple of weeks ago, weigh in on guest questions and much more. Don't miss out on that opportunity. 

Next, you're getting an awesome free guide that we created based on listener feedback and demand, which is our most popular guide; How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely for free along with all the other perks of being on the email list by signing up and joining the email list today at successpodcast.com. If you join right now you’re going to get another exclusive bonus guide that's a surprise. It's pretty awesome. It’s actually one of favorites personally, and you can get it just by going to the website, signing up, or texting the word “smarter” if you're on the go, just text “smarter” to the number 44222. 

Remember, the greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend either live or online. If you enjoyed this episode, please leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes. That helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. 

Don't forget, if you want to get all these incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we talked about on the show and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. You can get them at successpodcast.com, just to the show notes button right at the top. 

Thanks again, and we'll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success.

October 19, 2017 /Lace Gilger
High Performance, Mind Expansion
Emilie Wapnick-01.png

Can You Have It All In Career and Life? Learn the Secrets of Multipotentialites with Emilie Wapnick

August 03, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss what to do if you don’t know what you want to be when you grow up, we look at the concept that you only have one true calling, we learn how to become a better big picture thinkers, we look at the super-powers you can develop by being a “multi-potential- ite ,” how to master rapid learning and cultivate beginners mind, the fallacy behind the phrase “jack of all trades,” and much more with Emilie Wapnick.

Emilie is a speaker, career coach, founder of the popular blog Puttylike, and author of the book How To Be Everything: A Guide for those who still don't know what they want to be when they grow up. Her TED talk has been 3.7 million times and translated into over 36 languages. Her work has been featured in Fast Company, Forbes, Lifehacker, and more.

  • How Emilie’s diverse interests and passions lead her down the path of creating a community of people who wanted to do more than just focus on one thing in their lives

  • What does it mean to be “puttylike”

  • Who are Multi-potential-ites and what makes them so interesting and powerful?

  • Do you have a destiny, one true calling?

  • How the industrial revolution shaped our language and understanding of “what you do” being who you are (and why that’s wrong)

  • The idea that there is one specific thing you should master is a socially reinforced illusion & narrative

  • Do you have to focus on one thing to be able to be successful?

  • The assumption that you can either be a master of one thing or a jack of all trades is fundamentally flawed

  • There are non-linear and multi-connected and multi-faceted domains of knowledge that multi-potential-ites thrive in

  • The diminishing returns and 80/20 principle behind mastering knowledge in different domains

  • The Superpowers of Multipotentialites

  • Idea Syntehsis

    1. Rapid Learning (and passion)

    2. Adaptability

    3. Big Picture Thinking

    4. Relating and translating

  • How to cultivate the ability to be a better big picture thinker

  • Pattern recognition underpins many of these super-powers

  • How to master rapid learning and cultivate beginners mind

  • The power of exploring other fields and domains and how that can bring back new knowledge to the field you’re an expert in

  • The 4 common approaches that multi-potentialities use to succeed financially in today’s world

  • The “group hug” approach - combining all your interests into one thing

    1. The “slash” approach - creating separate and distinct revenue streams that you focus on fractionally

    2. The “Einstein” approach - find a job that supports your true passion

    3. The “Phoenix” approach - diving deep into a field, then pivoting out into something completely else

  • What you do for money isn’t necessarily more valuable than the other things you do in your life

  • Failure Celebration Week and taking the stigma away from failure

  • If you had 10 lives what would you want to be in each of them?

  • How to cultivate the variety you need in your life and career

  • The importance of getting everything out of your head and onto paper

  • And much more!

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

This Episode of The Science of Success is brought to you by our partners, That Moment Podcast. That Moment explores the pivot that changes everything: moments that open doors for discovery and growth, but also bring the looming possibility of failure. Each show features different leaders and innovators sharing their stories of taking risks in business and in life. That Moment is produced by Pivotal, who believes when change is the only constant, people and businesses must be built to adapt. Get the details of their first episode "It Was Essentially Disrupting Ourselves" here and check them out on iTunes, Google Play, and Soundcloud.

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Article] Are you a scanner personality? Maybe all you need is a good enough job. By Douglas Eby

  • [Blog Post] Failure Celebration Week Begins! #failweek By Emilie Wapnick

  • [Website] Marketing for Hippies

  • [Book Site] How to Be Everything by Emilie Wapnick

  • [Website] Puttylike

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[INTRODUCTION]

[0:00:12.6] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performers tick with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode we discuss what to do if you don't know what you want to be when you grow. We look at the concept that you only have one true calling. We learn how to become a better big picture thinker. We look at the superpowers you can develop by becoming a multipotentialite. We talk about how to master rapid learning and cultivate beginner’s mind. The fallacy behind the phrase the jack of all trades and much more with Emilie Wapnick. 

The Science of Success continues to grow with, now, more than a million downloads, listeners in over a hundred countries, hitting number one New and Noteworthy and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time ask me, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all these incredible information?” 

A lot of her listeners are curious about how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge I get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to awesome podcasts, and more. Because of that, we’ve created an epic resource just for you, a detailed guide called How to Organize and Remember Everything, and you can get it completely for free by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, it's a guide we created called How to Organize and Remember Everything. All you have to do to get it is to visit successpodcast.com and join our email list or text the word “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, that’s “smarter” to the number 44222. 


In a previous episode we discussed emotional agility and how you can cultivate it. Discovered that beneath your emotions are the signposts of the things that you value most, learn how to make space for motions and abrasive a willingness to experience difficult emotions. We talked about why it's vital to understand the distinction that emotions are meaningful but not always correct. We talked about how you can piggyback your habits to create very powerful strategies to live more aligned with your values and much more with Dr. Susan David. If you want to uncover the incredible truths hidden behind your emotions, listen to that episode. 

Lastly, if you want to get all the awesome information, links, transcripts, everything we’re going to talk about this episode and much more be sure to check out or show notes. Just go to successpodcast.com and hit the show notes button at the top. 

[INTERVIEW]

[0:02:58.6] MB: Today, we have another fascinating doesn't show, Emilie Wapnick. Emily is a speaker, career coach, found her of the popular blog, Puttylike and author of the book How to Be Everything: A Guide for Those Who (Still) Don’t Know What They Want to Be When They Grow Up. Her Ted Talk has been viewed more than 3.7 million times, translated into over 36 languages. Her work has been featured in Fast Company, Forbes, Life Hacker and many more places. 

Emily, welcome to the Science of Success. 

[0:03:28.0] EW: Thanks so much for having me. I’m man excited to be here. 

[0:03:30.7] MB: We’re very excited to have you on here today. For listeners who may not be familiar with you and some of the work you do, tell us your story and how you got started on this journey. 

[0:03:41.2] EW: Sure. Growing up, I had a lot of different interests. I played guitar and sang in a band. I was into various artistic mediums. I like English, kind of build websites, stumped around a lot. Actually, I went to law school, I’ve got 2 law degrees. I'm not listing all these things up to brag. It’s more to say that I was very confused and that I was very curious and had a lot of different interests. 

Looking back, I see how this enriched my life and how I picked up all kinds of amazing skills all over the place, but at the time it really caused me a lot of anxiety and I didn't really understand what was going on or why I couldn't stick with one thing. I worried a lot about my career and what I was going to end up doing and being and how I would ever stick with one job forever. 

In my mid-20s I had this moment where I kind of made the choice to stop fighting this impulse, to stop fighting my desire to do and be and learn about many different things and to instead say, “Okay. This is how I’m wired. I’m going to try and figure out how to make it work, practically speaking.” 

I started blogging and I started sharing my ideas and learning from other people who are doing many different things. How they were making it work, financially speaking, and sharing what I was learning and I had this idea like maybe I can create a community of people who don't want to just do one thing and we can figure this out together. That was in 2010. I've been at that for a while now. It has turned into a few different things. Yeah, that’s kind of my story in a nutshell. 

[0:05:27.2] MB: Tell me about that community that you created. I’m assuming that’s Puttylike. 

[0:05:33.0] EW: It is. 

[0:05:33.0] MB: What exactly does it mean to be Puttylike? 

[0:05:36.6] EW: Yeah. To be Puttylike means to be malleable, flexible, adaptable. I kind of like used the metaphor of putty, which changes shape. It’s malleable. The other word that I use a lot is multipotentialite, which is kind of my word for someone like this. I coined the term. There are other terms that people use to kind of connote the same idea, like polymath, or generalist, or Renaissance person, but I use multipotentialite or multipod for short sometimes. 

Yeah, it just means that you’re curious about a number of unrelated subjects and you don't necessarily feel like you have one true calling in life. Maybe there's a lot of different things that you want to do or try or experience. Yeah, unlike, say, a polymath, who is someone who’s very accomplished in multiple disciplines. Being a multipotentialite is really about being curious and just wanting to explore. 

[0:06:37.9] MB: That word is definitely a mouth-one. When I was reading up on you and doing some of the research before the shows, I was like multipotenta — I have a little bit of mouth dyslexia. That threw me for a loop. 

[0:06:49.4] EW: You can split it up into three parts, and that helps a little bit to go like multi-potential-lite.

[0:06:55.5] MB: Got it. No. I like the term. I think once you contextualize it and say, it's kind of the same thing as a Renaissance person or a polymath. It's someone with a lot of diverse interests that likes to tinker around and explore all kinds of unique and different things, essential. 

[0:07:14.2] EW: Yeah. Exactly. It actually comes from the word multi-potentiality, which is a term in psychology used to refer to people who display aptitudes across multiple disciplines. It’s kind of a play on that. 

[0:07:25.0] MB: Awesome. Tell me about — One of the age-old questions that people always get asked when they’re growing and even the age — As you’ve shown in your Ted Talk, age of 3, 5, etc., what are some of the dangers of asking somebody, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” 

[0:07:42.8] EW: Yeah. It's funny when you get asked this question as a little kid. It’s seen as like this fun, innocent little game, like the kid will be like, “Oh, I want to be a dinosaur when I grow up,” and everyone will be like, “Oh, that’s so cute.” 

As we get older, this question gets asked of you again and again and it gets to be like a more serious question and people expect like a real practical answer. One of the problems with this question is that you can't really answer it with five or six different things. Especially as you get older, people will kind of be like, “Okay. But, no. You have to choose.” You start to learn that you need to kind of narrow things down and pick one of your interest and kind of deny all of your other passions and let them go. 

That actually isn’t true. If you look around at the world and you look at successful people, really prominent cultural figures, people in your community, you’ll see that a lot of people do multiple things and are actually really good at multiple things. We grow with this idea that you need to specialize. You need to really just narrow-in on the one thing, like your destiny. It's almost a romantic notion. 

[0:08:55.6] MB: I definitely self-identify with this sort of multipotentialite idea, because even in my bio I’ve described myself as an investor and an accident podcaster. Those two things in and of themselves are very kind of disparate and not necessarily connected. There's deep things that sort of connect them once you understand how and why, but I definitely struggle with even answering the fundamental question which I’m sure you talk about as well, it’s the idea of what do you for a living. That caters to this sort of specialist understanding of the world. When in reality, I do a lot of different things and that they’re very diverse and some ways connected and some ways totally disconnected. 

[0:09:37.1] EW: Yeah, for sure. I think that we’re really encouraged in our culture to kind of identify with what we do for money. Whatever that thing is that is what you are, that is who you are, and that can be really inaccurate and also really hard to explain if you derive income from a number of different sources.

[0:10:00.4] MB: Tell me more about this idea that the social narrative that often gets reinforced, that we have this destiny, this one true calling. How do people get misled by that and what can we do to combat against that? 

[0:10:15.7] EW: It’s everywhere. It’s in our school systems. We’re asked to do a major. We hear things about not being a quitter and jack of all trades, master of none, and it's just like really in our vocabulary. The funny thing is it actually is a very — It very much comes from a specific time in history, so it really stems from at least the modern version of it. It stems from the Industrial Revolution, because back then we all had to be a cog in the system and that is how industry flourished. Through globalization, that model was brought to our school systems. We think of it as this kind of innate thing, but really it's social, it's historical and it's everywhere. It’s quite ubiquitous. 

In terms of combating that, I think just kind of realizing that it isn't like some sort of natural state. It's culturally based. There other times throughout history when the opposite was the ideal. Like during the Renaissance period, for example, you wanted to develop your mind in all areas. Those were the people that everyone looked up to. 

Also, I think, realizing that if you have many different passions and curiosities, there's something wrong with you, Actually, there a lot of other people that are like this who are making it work. I think that goes a long way to help kind of combat this. 

[0:11:43.5] MB: I want to attack this from a different angle a little bit, and I’m curious what your thoughts are, because anybody who listen to this is either thinking this or has heard this if they are a multipotentialite. The idea that deep focus is necessary to be successful and that people who have very different and sort of maybe disconnected interests just lack focus and they’re sort of drifting around without clarity in their lives. Tell me about how do you respond to someone who says you have to be focus specialist in order to succeed. 

[0:12:17.3] EW: I think there's a little bit of a confusion or a misconception there, which I think multipotentialites are actually very good at focusing. When we’re into something, we go quite deep and we kind of dive in and we learn really fast because we’re just so passionate about it. I think that this is where people confuse kind of multipotentialites with ADHD. It maybe looks the outside world like we’re unfocused, but really we are quite focused. We just have a lot of different interests. 

Also, you might find a multipotentialite who goes really deep, like spends their entire career going into one field. If that field is very multifaceted. Maybe it's the field like urban planning, or sustainable development where there are so many different areas that you need to understand just to work in that field. We don't look at that person and say, “Multipotentialite.” We say, “Oh, specialists.” Actually, they're using a lot of different skills in their work. 

What I find when I look around at the world, and I’ve spent a lot of time talking with successful multipotentialites, that they tend to be quite focused and they tend to even be experts. I think we assume that you can either be really good at one thing or you're just totally terrible at everything. Actually, there's a huge middle ground there. It is entirely possible to be very good at several things.

[0:13:48.2] MB: What a great distinction. You’re right. The language we use around this almost precludes the understanding of it from that perspective, which is this jack of all trades, master of none. In reality, people are so unique and different that it’s entirely possible to be a deep expert in several different things at the same time. I feel like we often fall prey to the presumption that just because you have varied things you're interested, it's not possible for you to be well-versed in several of them. 

[0:14:21.4] EW: Yeah. For sure. I think people look at it in this theoretical mathematical way, like if you spend 10,000 hours on this, but you only spends 2,500 — Whatever, hours on something else, like you’re going to be more skilled at this. Actually, it doesn't really work that. People are combining their skillsets and their interests and we’re creating new things at the intersections and we’re integrating our ideas and connecting them. It's not this linear thing. Technical skill isn't all that matters. Sometimes it's about creativity and innovation and what you do differently as supposed to just being the world-class or technically speaking. 

[0:15:07.3] MB: I think that really segues into what you’ve talked and written these super powers that multipotentialites have. Before we dip into that, another thing that that just kind of brought to mind for me is the idea and the interrelationship between the 80-20 principle in the concept of diminishing returns, which is if you can kind of step into an area, a domain of knowledge that interest you and you can get that 20% of knowledge that carries 80% of the freight for understanding and connecting and working with those ideas, there is massive diminishing returns to spending the other — Mastering the other 80% of that information that you're only going to get an additional sort of 20% of leverage out of.

[0:15:50.1] EW: Yeah. That’s a really good point. That makes me think of Tim Ferriss, and he talks a lot about how you can become world-class, if that is your goal in a much quicker time frame than people think. He is someone who goes very deep, but he also has a lot of different skills and he’s done a ton of different things. 

[0:16:12.0] MB: Let’s dig in to those super powers now. Tell me about what are some of the positives or the upsides, as you call them, super powers, that multipotentialites have and that they can leverage to succeed. 

[0:16:25.5] EW: Yeah. I go through five in the book, and I'm sure that there are others, but the five that I go through are idea synthesis. Taking two ideas or subjects that don't normally go together and creating something new at the intersection. We tend to be really good at kind of connecting those dots because we have all these different backgrounds. 

One of the examples that your listeners might be familiar with, in Steve Jobs' commencement speech at Stanford he talks about how he dropped out of college and then he sat in on calligraphy class. Just one random calligraphy class, but that class became the inspiration for the beautiful typeface of the Apple Computer years later. There's an example of kind of mushing two things together that don't normally go together and creating something new and unique. 

The second one is rapid learning, and that just means we are so used to being beginners and jumping into new things that it becomes kind of second nature to us and we’re used to stepping out of our comfort zones and kind of diving in and getting past those early sticking points because we’ve done it some many times. We also tend to be really passionate about things we become interested in. Like I mentioned earlier, we really dive in and learn all that we can in a short timeframe. 

The third one is adaptability. We can kind of take on different roles and perform different kind of tasks depending on what's required, depending on the market even. If you’ve got a variety of different skills and things kind of dry up in one area, you can lean on those other skills. We’re quite adaptable. We’re kind of good at kind of taking new challenges, taking on new challenges and using our old skills and build on them to pick up new skills. That’s a huge asset in an economy that is changing so quickly. 

The fourth one go into I believe is big picture thinking. We tend to be kind of the ones seeing the big picture. We have these big ideas. There is a huge overlap between multipotentialites and entrepreneurs and I think this is why we sort of have this idea of how things could be because we see how everything is linked up and we can spot kind of these bigger systematic problems. Multipotentialites tend to be passionate visionaries a lot of the time. 

Then — What was my last one? Yeah, relating and translating. We’re really fascinated by people, all kinds of different people. We love learning about different things and we’re really good at relating to people in different fields both because we’re interested and because we might have a background in all those different things. You can usually find something to talk about with someone if you're really curious. We’re also very good at translating between people. 

If you're working with a big interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary team and you’ve got designers over here talking one language and kind of the tech people, programmers over here talking another language. If you understand both worlds, because you may be experienced both or you have skills in both areas, you can kind of help each team understand what the other one is saying and you can bring that bigger vision to life. 

[0:19:52.0] MB: I’d love to dig into to some of these and talk a little bit more. Tell me about — One of the ones that fascinates me is big picture thinking. For somebody who’d listening, how can we cultivate the ability to be better big picture thinkers and why is that such an important skillset? 

[0:20:10.5] EW: Yeah. I think it’s about the ability to kind of zoom out and see problems more holistically and to kind of — Pattern recognition is a big one, I think, for a lot of these superpowers. I think just like paying attention. Again, I feel like I've been asked how do you come up with an idea for a business, but paying attention to the problems and to what's going on and how it's affecting different people and how you can help and kind of learning to zoom out to see the broader context of what's going on. I’m not sure if that’s very helpful, but I’m trying to think if there are specific skills. I think it’s just a matter of practice and just learning to notice things and to spot those connections and those patterns. 

[0:20:57.6] MB: Specifically, in the bucket of idea synthesis, the famous kind of story about Steve Jobs and calligraphy. There are so many unconnected or interconnected things that if we experiment in  different fields of study or different areas of knowledge, we can often draw these connections and bring things together that may not have been initially linked or create these whole new opportunities. 

Another story that — We had some previous guests, Art Markman and Bob Duke who came in and talked about the decoration of the Dyson vacuum cleaner. The founder went to a lumber mill and saw how they were sucking up all the sawdust and said, “Hey, that's really interesting technology. I wonder what other applications of that may be.” Eventually, decided to turn into a vacuum cleaner and because a very successful company. 

There’s all of these really interesting ways that Steve Jobs says, “You can’t always know looking forward, how the various pieces of knowledge the you pickup are going to connect.” Looking backwards, it's makes a lot of sense. 

[0:22:02.5] EW: Yeah. I think that’s comforting to think about because a lot of the times, when we lose interest in a field, we might be like, “Oh, well. That was a waste of time and maybe money,” but you never know how that knowledge is going to come back around and where you might apply it. 

[0:22:17.7] MB: In a world where change is one of the only constants, people and businesses must be adaptable. This episode of The Science of Success is sponsored by our partners at That Moment, a new podcast about the pivot that changes everything. Sometimes we recognize the need to seize the moment and change course. Other times, we have no choice but to pivot. 

During these rapidly changing times, pivots can bring uncertainty, fear, and the looming possibility of failure, but can also open doors for discovery, growth, and change. In each episode of That Moment, business leaders and entrepreneurs share their stories of taking risks and finding success at work and in life. From autonomous cars to new sensor technology, the insurance of driving is changing. 

In the latest episode of That Moment, hear about how Allstate is leveraging new technologies to test, learn, and develop more quickly. Then, Naomi Starkman tells her story about walking away from the New Yorker to become a farmer. Why did she make this pivot, and what is she doing now? Find out on the latest episode of That Moment, available wherever you listen to podcasts. 

[0:23:24.6] MB: Talk to me more about this, the idea of rapid learning and adaptability and how can somebody who’s listening that maybe isn't a multipotentialite or even those who are, how can they master this skill of rapid learning and cultivate it more effectively? 

[0:23:41.4] EW: Again, I think that it's practice. I think that it’s really about getting comfortable with that early learning curve where you just feel really awkward and incompetent and realizing that that is the first stage to being like kind of good and being better and then eventually mastering it. Just doing that again and again and again and it's pretty uncomfortable, I think a lot of people don't want to do it. If you're interested in something and you've got this curiosity, it can help you kind of — Can push you to do that. 

I really think it's just practice. There are kinds of techniques out there to learn faster, but I think that having the passion. For me, anyway, that is what has fueled my learning and if I'm not passionate about something, I have a much harder time learning it. 

[0:24:32.3] MB: In many ways, it’s almost like the idea of cultivating beginner’s mind again and again when you're rapidly transitioning between different areas of knowledge, you're having to cultivate the skillsets and the abilities to start from scratch and say, “Okay. What are the big pieces I need to master first so that I can kind of, again, going back to almost that 80-20 thing again? How can I master the big chunks of knowledge that are the easiest to pick up that are going to give me most of the heavy lifting to really start to understand how the pieces fit together in this particular world?” 

[0:25:07.1] EW: I think you’ll also find that as you acquire more skills and dive into more things, it gets easier, because you start to see, “Oh, this thing here is kind of like that other thing that I did.” You’re not really starting from zero. 

[0:25:20.8] MB: Tell me about — For somebody who’s listening that is some more of a — What’s the opposite or sort of a specialist? Is that what you could call somebody? 

[0:25:29.9] EW: That’s the easiest way to frame it. It’s a little bit challenging though, because multipotentialites can sometimes look like specialists, the outside, and really they’ve got like a project, like a business, or like I said, they’re working in an interdisciplinary field. They’re using a lot of different skills, but to the outside they looks like they're specializing. Yeah, I guess it's someone who really just has one focus and isn't interested in many other things and isn't particularly curious and just really likes going deep in one area and is pretty content with that. 

[0:26:08.0] MB: I guess what I'm trying to draw out is, is for people who are listening that aren’t multipotentilites, what lessons can they draw from multipotentialites that might help them in whatever field they're really going deep on? 

[0:26:23.0] EW: I think that exploring other things outside of your main works can be really beneficial. It can give you new ideas. It can kind of make your work stand out and make it a little bit more unique. It can also provide a nice break, which is good for energy levels. I do think that specialists and multipotentialites make really good teams, because you’ve got someone who's kind of scanning the horizon and bringing in different ideas and then you’ve got another person who's implementing and going really deep. I think they both have value. 

[0:26:57.2] MB: I think there's two breakpoints there. One of them is this idea that just dabbling in something else, another field of knowledge, can help you bring back some really interesting lessons that you can cross-apply to your primary domain of expertise. The second one which is something we haven't really necessarily touched on but has underpinned most of the conversations is the idea that being either sort of a specialist or a multipotentialite, no one is better than the other. In fact, it’s really that they both very mutually complementary and when you can put these things together, figuring out do you lean more towards multipotentiality or do you lean more towards specialization and find people who complement your skillset so you can really create a situation where one plus one doesn't necessarily equal two when you're combining forces like that. 

[0:27:47.6] EW: Right. Yeah. 

[0:27:49.1] MB: One of the other topics that you’ve talked about and written about is how can a multipotentialite I be financially successful in today’s world and what are some of the strategies that they can use, because our economic structures in many ways are geared more towards rewarding specialization? What are some of the specific strategies that multipotentialites can use to really succeed financially in today's world? 

[0:28:17.0] EW: Yeah. This was the main question I wanted to answer when I started researching and working on my new book, and what I did was I interviewed about 50 multipotentialites who self-describe as being both happy and financially comfortable and then I sent out a couple of surveys and I got a few thousand replies to those. I had a lot of data to work with. I wanted to know how multipotentialites make a living. What I found is that there's no Holy Grail career. I guess it’s not that surprising, but there’s no one job that works for every multipotentialite, and I was meeting people in all different fields, doing all kinds of different work. 

What I was able to do is I realized that there are kind of these four work models, these four commonly used work models that multipotentialites use. Before I go into the four, I want to just point out that it is entirely possible to be a hybrid, and I never like to tell people to just choose one thing, especially not my audience. You can mix and match these. You can customize this stuff. I did find that there are kind of these four approaches. The first one is what I call the group hug approach, and this is where you combine your interests in one multifaceted job or business. Maybe you work at a company that maybe it's a smaller company where you get to kind of step out of your job description a little bit and propose different project and ideas and wear many different hats, Maybe you're working in an interdisciplinary field where you're integrating your various interests and skills just to kind of work in that area. Maybe you’re running a business, because running a business means wearing a lot of different hats especially at the beginning. There's so much that goes into it. There's product development, customer service, legal, finance, all these stuff. That's one approach. 

The second commonly used work model is the /approach, and this is where instead of combining your interest, you’ve got a few separate distinct revenue streams that you kind of flip between over the course of a week or a month. This is someone who is a program/teachers/stand-up comedian. They’ve got these very discreet jobs or businesses, these part-time things that they do. The people that I've spoken to who use this work model, they tell me that part-time is kind of the dream. They love each of their different jobs for different reasons, but wouldn't want to do anyone of them full-time. This is a way to stick with a few different things and to still get that variety, because that’s the piece that’s really missing in a lot of conventional career advice, the need for variety which is huge for multipotentialites. 

The third commonly used work model is the Einstein approach, and I called it that because Albert Einstein worked at the patent office for several years who is basically employed by the government. He had this very stable day job that took care of his financial needs, and then he explored his theories on the side. 

This is what author Barbara Sher refers to as a good enough job, is where you have a job or even one narrow lucrative business that will do it, where it pays the bills and then it also leaves you with enough free time and energy to pursue your many passions on the side. This is someone — I interviewed a guy for the book named Charlie Harper who is an IT director by day, just straight up 9 to 5, and then he leaves the office and he goes to musical theater practice or acapella practice and on the weekend he builds furniture and he just recently built a boat. 

The beauty about this approach is that you don't have to worry about monetizing all of your little interest and everything that you become interested in because we’re very curious. That can really take the pressure off. It doesn't work for everybody, but for some people the Einstein approach is a really good fit. 

Then we’ve got the fourth commonly used work model, the Phoenix approach. This is because if you think of a Phoenix, kind of lives this glorious life and at the end they are up in flames and are reborn from the ashes. This is someone who dives into a field, builds a career, and kind of when they feel like they have gotten their feel, they kind of, “Yeah. I’ve got this. I’m ready for a new adventure.” They transition and begin a new career in a totally new field and kind of moves through their passion in a sequential way, so one after the next after the next often with several years between each switch as opposed to maybe a couple of hours as with someone using the /approach.

[0:33:17.5] MB: It’s so interesting and I find it fascinating that you’ve interviewed all of these different people to pull up this knowledge, because I still — It's so socially conditioned that focus is good and distraction or having lots of little things going on is bad, that I keep sort of circling back to this question or fear of doubt of like, “But what about the fact that if I just focused on something I could be more successful?” 

[0:33:46.2] EW: Right. You could be, but if you're multipotentialite, at some point you might become bored and you might feel like you're not actually being challenged very much and you’re just doing the same thing again and again and again. 

[0:33:56.4] MB: I think Tony Robins said that success without fulfillment is the ultimate failure. 

[0:34:02.0] EW: There you go. 

[0:34:03.9] MB: Another good example that even in just the naming of that approach, the Einstein approach. If you look at somebody like Einstein, tremendously successful individual and live on in the history books for millennia probably. He was somebody who his income was divorced from what he actually did. 

[0:34:25.4] EW: Yeah, for sure. That’s the thing. We have this idea that what we do for money is more valuable than the other things that we do in our lives and profitability does not necessarily equal value. There are a lot of other rewards to engaging with our interests. Personal development and acquiring other skills and just enjoyments and connecting with other people, there’s a lot of things that we can get out of something even if it isn't paying the bills. It's okay to kind of separate the money from the meaning and the variety as long as you have all those elements in your life. 

[0:35:10.1] MB: I think that echoes in many ways some of the same lessons that Tim Ferriss talks about in The 4-Hour Workweek, which is the idea of get a business and get it where it can support you so that you can go do whatever you want to do. 

[0:35:21.8] EW: Yeah. I would say that that book really defines the Einstein approach with a self-employment slant to it, so kind of that good enough business where you’ve got. It’s paying the bills, you’re working as little as possible for it to support you and you really define your financial goals. Then you have all of these free time to go explore and to do all these amazing things. 

[0:35:47.7] MB: One of the other topics the you’ve written about, it's not directly related to what we’ve been going in, but I think it's very relevant to a lot of this, which is the idea of celebrating our failures. Can you tell me a little bit about the concept and what that means to you? 

[0:36:01.9] EW: Yeah. Actually, a few years back we did this thing called failure celebration week on Puttylike, and the idea was to just kind of take the stigma out of failure, because we all have to try things and “fail sometimes” to learn. Often, what looks like failure is really just feedback, that's what people say and is just the sign, “Okay. Maybe I need to shift my approach and try something else,” and it's really a necessary step on the way to learning. 

For failure celebration week we all kind of shared — People wrote different blog posts about their spectacular failures and often they were what led them to where they are now. They were just an integral part of their ultimate success. It was cool too. We had people using the #failweek and they were like, “Oh, I was doing the dishes and I got water all over my dress shirt, #failweek.” We’d be like, “Yey! Way to go,” and just to kind of take that stigma out of it and to be like, “Everyone fails all the time and it's okay and it's necessary.” 

[0:37:12.2] MB: It’s a great point. One of the things that we’ve talked previously on the shows is this idea that, as Charlie Monger said, who, again, is somebody that I’m a huge a fan of. We talk about him all the time here. He said that you only need to get rich once. If you think about that, what it means is you can fail a ton of time, but if you just succeed one time, that’s all that matters. If you just hit it. If you just hit a home run once in the financial sense, that’s it. Then you’ve made it. 

We're so evolutionarily programmed in our biology and our minds are structured in a way that we want to avoid and minimize failure because of all the social repercussions and everything else. When it today’s society, today’s world, in almost every instance, it just doesn't really matter. In fact, fear of failure over a longer time horizon is actually much much worse for you than trying and failing at a bunch of different projects. 

[0:38:14.6] EW: Yeah, absolutely. You can't hit that one win if you're not going to fail a bunch first. I do think it's quite true that if you look at a lot of really successful people, they have a string of failures before they kind of figure out what works. 

[0:38:34.7] MB: What advice would you have for somebody who's listening that still doesn't know “what they want to be when they grow up”?

[0:38:42.2] EW: Well, I would say get a piece of paper out and start writing down all of your interests and passions and skills and getting it all out on paper. When I do this exercise with people in workshops and whatever, I always tell them like, “If you’re becoming interested in something and even if you’re not that good at it yet, write it down. Get your interests on there too. If you're not sure whether to include something, included it. Just get everything out on paper.” 

From there you can starts taking a look at what kind of work model would be a good fit for you and what that might look like. If you're thinking that the group hug approach, it sounds really nice to kind of combine your interest. What goes well together? Could you bring knowledge from one area of interest to an audience related to another interest of yours? 

There’s a guy who has a really neat business called Marketing for Hippies, and he’s got background both in marketing world and in the kind of green holistic nonprofit world. He takes marketing principles and translates it into a language that his audience can relate to, because typically marketing principles do not appeal to the hippie audience. 

There something like that for you. Can you bridge a gap between two things that don't normally go together? Is there a field that exists out there that is kind of an amalgamation of several of your interests? When it comes to the other work models for the /approach, you might think like which one of these skills can I monetize and what would that look like if I paired three of these together, and maybe picking three different ones just to kind of change it up so you’re not doing the same thing all the time just to get that variety. 

For the Einstein approach, you may think like, “What is the “practical interest” on this page? If I were to show this to a regular career counselor, what they say? What would they tell me to do?” That's often a good way to start thinking about some good enough jobs or you can do kind of the Tim Ferriss approach and be like, “Which one of these skills is the most lucrative? Which could I turn into a really profitable business even if it's super narrow?” 

With the Phoenix approach, my favorite exercise for that is to pretend you've got 10 lives and to just make a list of what you would be in each of those lives, and that's a really cool way to start thinking about if I want to have one career for 6 to 10, I can you do that and then switch to something else, and here’s what that might look like.

[0:41:23.5] MB: That's a great questions. I love questions that pull you out of your own ego and kind of the things you used to distract yourself and talk yourself out of doing things and really give you clarity about where you want to go, and that's a great example of, “Okay. If I didn't have all the social and emotional baggage that’s telling me that I need to do X, what would I do with 10 different lives?” That's a great way to kind of break through some of that and really get clarity about the opportunities the you want to pursue. 

[0:41:54.4] EW: Yeah. I think that the main issue here is that variety is not considered — I mean it’s not just a priority in a lot of conditional career models. If you know you're multipotentialite or you think you might be one, then variety is really important to you. You need to kind of figure out how you’re going to get that variety, and that's what I really like about these work models is I found that this was what people were using to get the variety they need in their lives and in their careers. I think just keeping that in mind that you don't need to choose one thing. You can have variety and also have the financial stability at the same time. 

[0:42:38.5] MB: What one piece of actionable advice or kind of homework you would give to a listener who wants to concretely implement some of the things we’ve talked about today? 

[0:42:50.2] EW: I think that the exercises that I just went through is a really good one. I think it's really important to get everything out of your head and on to the page. Just something visual that you can see, you move things around because it can be a little smooshie if it's just ideas in your head. I think, yeah, just kind of thinking about your different backgrounds and where things have led you and maybe some of the different skills that you've acquired and have implemented, laterally, in other fields and just taking stock of all of the things that you know and all of the things that you've learned and all of the things you're curious about and how that diversity has really enhanced your life and maybe getting a little bit clear on that and journaling a little bit on that can help. 

[0:43:38.2] MB: For listeners who want to follow you and learn more, where can people find you and your blog and your book online? 

[0:43:46.3] EW: Yeah, they can learn more about the book at howtobeeverything.com and if they want to swing by the community, check out the blog. That can be found at puttylike.com.

[0:43:59.5] MB: Awesome. Emilie, thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing all your wisdom. As a multipotentialite myself, this has been really interesting and a lot of these has resonated with me personally. Thank you for sharing all of your knowledge with me. 

[0:44:15.5] EW: Great. Thanks so much for having me, Matt. 

[END OF INTERVIEW]

[0:44:17.6] MB: Thank you so much for listening to The Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story, or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@successpodcast.com. That’s matt@sucesspodcast.com. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every listener email.

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes, because that helps more and more people discover The Science of Success. 
	
I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all these information?” Because of that, we’ve created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. You can get it by texting the word “smarter”, that’s “smarter” to the number 44222, or by going to successpodcast.com, that’s successpodcast.com and joining our email list. If you want to get all these incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we just talked about in this show and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to successpodcast.com and hit the show notes button at the top. 

Thanks again, and we’ll see you on the next episode of The Science of Success. 

[END]


August 03, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
RyanHoliday-01.png

A Powerful 2000 Year Old Life Hack & Creating Work That Lasts for Generations with Ryan Holiday

July 20, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss how our perception of reality dramatically shifts what actions we take, why you should embrace 2000+ years of wisdom to be happier and more productive, how to stop judging yourself and others based on your achievements and root your identity in something within your control, we look at how we can cultivate a more humble and resilient world view, discuss strategies for connecting with top tier mentors, and much more with Ryan Holiday. 

Ryan Holiday is a media strategist and writer. He is the bestselling author of over five books including The Obstacle is the Way, Ego is The Enemy, and most recently his upcoming book Perennial Seller: The Art of Making and Marketing Work That Lasts. Ryan previously worked as the director of marketing for American Apparel, working on several controversial campaigns,  before starting his own creative agency. His work has been featured in The Huffington Post, Fast Company, Forbes, and more!

  • Why you should understand the Stoic discipline of "perception"

  • The way in which we see the world changes how we interact with it

  • How to accept situations as they are, not as you want them to be

  • Why you shouldn't waste time figuring out how things happened, who is to blame, etc - you should shift your focus to constructively determining the next thing to do

  • “There’s no problem so bad (in space) that you can’t make it worse”

  • The challenge of perception is not making the situations in your life worse with interpretations, resentments, anxieties

  • The story of Amelia Earhart and how you can use it to take action in the face of challenges

  • When you’re offended, when you think something is beneath you, you are projecting onto that situation something that may not be there

  • How do you react when people don’t think you have what it takes?

  • How to make yourself the most important person in a room, not by posturing, but by what you can contribute

  • How we can flip obstacles on their heads and view setbacks as opportunities

  • “What stands in the way becomes the way”

  • We have the ability with our minds to change how anything means

  • Setbacks make some people worse, some people tough it out, other people get even better

  • What is “Stoic Optimism” and why stoicism is not a focus on the negative

  • The distinction between Being and Doing and why its so critical

  • Should you do the “right thing” even if it pisses people off, hurts your chances of being promoted, causes political infighting, and worse?

  • Many people make the choice unknowingly between being and doing - and end up one day wondering where it all went wrong

  • How do we untangle success from our identities?

  • How do we avoid the trap of judging people based on their achievements?

  • The importance of being able to measure yourself by an internal score card - and not the external score card of accomplishment and achievement

  • Focus on basing your identity on an internals scorecard that is within your control

  • Decide what’s important to you, and root it within the things you control

  • How do we anchor our identity and self worth on a more stable footing?

  • How to have a more humble and resilient worldview

  • The critical difference between stoicism vs pessimism and how to look at both sides of the coin and realizing there are no good or bad outcomes - just outcomes

  • Everything is relative and subjective - someone in the third world would kill to live the life you may think of as failure

  • The world isn’t saying “this is happening to you because its bad” its just saying “this is happening”

  • The hard work of stoicism is the practice of doing it every day

  • “The message is the marketing” and how you shouldn’t distinguish between the making and the marketing when creating something

  • Why Ryan writes so much about ancient philosophy and how you should focus on rooting your ideas in timeless principles

  • The tactics Ryan used to build a relationship with and become an apprentice of Robert Greene

  • The people who need mentoring the most often get the least mentoring

  • Do well and a mentor will find you, put in the work, show the potential, and then mentors will naturally start to show up in your life

  • How Ryan approaches the creative process and the strategy he uses to test new ideas

  • You have an idea, you test that idea, and you work on it every single day - it gets 1% better every day - and at the end it’s finally good

  • Every book should be an article before its a book, every article should be a dinner conversation before its an article

  • Most of the marketing of anything that lasts is really about the product itself

  • Strategies Ryan recommends for finding a market for our ideas or concepts

  • Don’t create a solution in search of a problem, find problems and build solutions

  • How to uncover the problems that people are struggling with that you can help solve

  • What are needs that people have that there are currently no solutions?

  • How Ryan would start building an audience from scratch today if he had to start over

  • If you don’t collect your fans and have direct access to them - you are at risk - own your relationships with your customers and fans as much as possible

  • How Ryan deals with staying creative and productive with a new born child

  • Why Ryan hates the question of “what's the biggest struggle you’ve had to overcome”

  • Time you spend dwelling on the past (negatively or positively) is wasted time and attention

  • What Ryan journals about every morning and how he implmenents stoic philopsphy into his life

  • And much more!

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

This Episode of The Science of Success is brought to you by our partners, That Moment Podcast. That Moment explores the pivot that changes everything: moments that open doors for discovery and growth, but also bring the looming possibility of failure. Each show features different leaders and innovators sharing their stories of taking risks in business and in life. That Moment is produced by Pivotal, who believes when change is the only constant, people and businesses must be built to adapt. Get the details of their first episode "It Was Essentially Disrupting Ourselves" here and check them out on iTunes, Google Play, and Soundcloud.

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] Perennial Seller: The Art of Making and Marketing Work that Lasts by Ryan Holiday

  • [Book] Ego Is the Enemy by Ryan Holiday

  • [Website] Ryan Holiday

  • [Book] Meditations by Marcus Aurelius

  • [Book] Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War by Robert Coram

  • [Book] The Tao of Seneca: Practical Letters from a Stoic Master, Volume 1 Seneca presented by Tim Ferriss Audio

Episode Transcript


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[0:00:12.6] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performers tick with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode we discussed how our perception of reality dramatically shifts what actions we take, why you should embrace 2000+ years of wisdom to be happier and more productive, how to stop judging yourself and others based on your achievements and root your identity and something within your control. We look at how to cultivate a more humble and resilient worldview, discuss strategies for cultivating top-tier mentors and much more with Ryan Holliday. 

The Science of Success continues to grow with, now, more than a million downloads, listeners in over a hundred countries, hitting number one New and Note with Noteworthy and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time ask me, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all these incredible information?” A lot of her listeners are curious how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge I get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to awesome podcasts and more. 

Because of that, we’ve created an epic resource just for you; a detailed guide called How to Organize and Remember Everything, and you can get it completely for free by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, it's a guide we created called How to Organize and Remember Everything. All you have to do to get it is to visit successpodcast.com and join our email list or text the word “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, that “smarter” to the number 44222. 

In previous episode we discussed the dangers of playing it safe in life. How we can learn to celebrate more; the power cheering on, showing up, and serving other people. How to balance the acceptance of negative emotions with amplifying the good and focusing on the positive. What it means to live life in the front row. Lessons learned about living life from people who are fighting for the lives and much more with our guest John Vroman. If you want to live a life full of joy and celebration, listen to that episode. 

Lastly, if you want to get all the incredible information in this episode, links, transcripts, everything were going to talk about and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to successpodcast.com, hit the show notes button at the top. 

[0:02:49.6] MB: Today, we have another awesome guest on the show, Ryan Holliday. Ryan is a media strategist and writer. He’s the best-selling author of over five books including The Obstacles is the Way, Ego is the Enemy, and most recently his upcoming book, Perennial Seller: The Art of Making and Marketing Work That Lasts. 

Ryan previously work as the director of marketing for American Apparel working on several controversial campaigns before starting his own creative agency. His work has been featured in the Huffington Post, Fast Company, Forbes, and more. 

Ryan, welcome to the Science of Success. 

[0:03:22.2] RH: Thanks for having me. 

[0:03:23.1] MB: We’re very excited to have you on here today. I’d love to start out with one my absolute favorite topics from Obstacles is the Way was the concept of perception and kind of the idea of perceiving things as they are as opposed to as we want them to be. Could you kind of explain that concept and touch on that a little bit? 

[0:03:43.5] RH: Yeah. The Obstacles is the Way is book I’ve tried to root in ancient philosophy known as stoicism, and that the Stoics talk a lot about — They have thing, the discipline of perception. What they're really talking about is the way in which we see the world changes how we interact with it. Not The Secret. Not, :”Hey, if I wish for this, it will come true,” but if you think that something is unfair, it will be unfair and it will feel negative. If you think that something simply is what it is, it will be easier to deal with. 

What the Stoics are trying to do is see everything objective and they're trying to remember that there really is no good or bad, or positive or negative in any situation, it's just what we tell ourselves about it. I think, “Look, an entrepreneur doesn’t have time to think about whether something is right or not, or fair or not, or appropriate or not. Just has time to think about what we’re going to do, because we have payroll to meet, we have employees that we’ve got to handle. We’ve got goals that we’re trying to achieve.” Getting distracted about whether we wanted this to happen or not is really just a poor use of resources. 

I think on top of that, it’s trying to then see the good in every situation. What is the opportunity that this presents for me? What am I going to with this situation? If there’s some difficulty or trauma or problem, obviously, you’re going to say, “I’m going to reluctantly deal with this,” or you can say, “Oh, this gives me this chance to do this thing I wasn't going to do otherwise.” 

[0:05:26.3] MB: I think this discipline really opened my eyes. Once you’re kind of aware of this idea, it's so common to see people who are kind of trapped in a cycle of getting caught up in non-acceptance of the way things are and they’re so caught up in, “OH, this isn’t fair.” “Oh, this shouldn't be this way.” “Oh, I shouldn't have to deal with this,” and that really causes a lot of sabotage when they’re trying to achieve whatever goals that they’ve hey set out. 

[0:05:51.4] RH: Yeah, of course. Not only that, I think people waste a lot of time trying to figure out how stuff happened. They want to know who’s to blame. They want to know how this could have been avoided. They’re not looking at it constructively in terms of preventing it in the future. They’re just dwelling on how they got to this point rather than spending time thinking about how they're going to get to the next point. 

I think it obviously bears worth pointing out, there is a quote from Chris Hadfield, he’s the Canadian astronaut. He’s saying, “There's no problem so bad in space that you can't make it worse.” I think part of what the discipline of perception is not making it worse with interpretations, or resentments, or worries, or anxieties. It's just dealing with the thing in front of you because that's hard enough as it is. 

[0:06:46.1] MB: That's a great quote, and we actually have an upcoming interview with Chris. Listeners, definitely have a lookout for that. Got a fascinating story. I think that quote is really important and really underscores why it's so critical to perceive things as they are as supposed kind of as you want them to be. 

[0:07:03.9] RH: Yeah, exactly. They are what they are. Let's make the most of them. Let's not spend a second wishing they were otherwise is what the Stoics would say. 

[0:07:15.5] MB: Is that the chapter where you kind of give the example of Amelia Earhart. I thought that was a really powerful story from the book. 

[0:07:22.8] RH: Actually, I use that story, the discipline of action, which is, “Okay, it's not just how you see the information, but what do you do with it?” Amelia Earhart was famously early in her career offered a spot on a flight that was to be the first female transatlantic flight, except for she wasn't — It basically all for show. She wasn't going to fly the plane. There’s going to be two male pilots who were doing the flying. She was basically going to be the navigator, which meant she was just going to sort of sit in the back. In some senses is a very patronizing offer. It’s an offensive offer. the other two pilots are paid. I believe she wasn’t paid. 

You can picture her getting that phone call and you could picture her being perfectly within her rights to slam the phone down and say, “How dare you? I deserve better,” and she did deserve better. That's not what she did. She said, “Yes,” she took the flight. She used the fame that this sort of token opportunity brought with it to build a platform to build a name for herself which she then used to do what she wanted to do. 

Then part of this too is when you're offended by something, when you think that something is beneath you, this is also a form of judgment. This isn't taking something for what it is and working with it to the best of your ability. This is projecting on to it, sort of a deliberate animus which might not be there. It might just be that the system is inherently fair or that the system is indifferent to you as a person, and then saying, “Okay, all I need to do is get my foot in the door. I need to work with this. I’m going to make the most of it,” and I think that's what she did. Had she not done that, where might her career have gone? 

[0:09:12.5] MB: I share that story a lot with people who are just getting started. It reminds me of another tactic you recommend in ego, which is the idea of the canvas strategy. Can you talk a little about that? 

[0:09:25.3] RH: Yeah. Early on in my career, I think any young person — Bing a young white guy, obviously the discrimination or the adversity that I faced sort of have been nothing compared to a woman trying to be a pilot in the 1920s. Any young person can at least superficially relate to being underestimated, to being seen as unnecessary, to being seen as less than. In any point in your career, particularly early, there are going to be people who don't think you have what it takes, and what are you going to do with that? Are you going to overcompensate for it by being confident overconfident, overconfident and make things worse? Are you going to say, “Okay, look. I’m consider to be the least important person in this room. I’m going to work with that and I’m going to make myself an important person in this room not by my posturing, but in terms of what I can contribute.” 

I think if you're an intern out there, an assistant out there, really embracing the idea of, “Look, my job is to make my boss look very good, and I’m going to make myself indispensable in this organization not by chasing credit, but by making everyone in this room better and finding opportunities for other —“ I said canvas. Finding canvases for other people to paint on.” Is that finding articles for your boss to read? Is that staying late and doing extra research on this project that you know they haven’t had time to look at? Is it giving ideas away to other people inside the company that they can take credit for? Is it bringing them potential clients or projects or opportunities or introducing them to new things that you as a young person might have insight into that an older person might not? What are the things that nobody else in the organization wants to do that you are willing to do? Sort of building up your credibility and your skills that way not by trying to get credit, but in some ways, by deliberately giving credit away. 

[0:11:24.6] MB: I think there's a corollary to that as well when you think about taking responsibility for something. So often people think, “Oh, I need to deflect the blame. I need to make sure that I don't get caught up in this.” When in reality, counterintuitively, often taking responsibility, taking the blame for when things go wrong is really one of the most powerful things that you can do. 

[0:11:45.0] RH: Yeah, I would think that's true also. Look, earlier on in your career, it's accepting that your role is to deal with and take the heat for stuff that other people don't want to have to do, that that's part of the job. If you can embrace that, if you can do the things that other people don't want to do, then all of a sudden people are going to start to lean on you. They’re going to send you stuff. They’re going to start to see what you have. Nobody is going to hand you the position you magically want. I think you have to earn it. 

[0:12:17.3] MB: Another on the topic from Obstacle what I’ve found really interesting. In many ways, it’s kind of the core thesis of the book. Talk a little bit about how should we approach dealing with setbacks. 

[0:12:28.5] RH: I think this goes to the discipline of perception a little bit as well. Obviously, are you going to see this as this thing to put up with? Are you going to see this as this thing that’s very unfortunate? Are you going to see this as a setback, or are you instead going to see it as an opportunity of one kind or another? Marcus Aurelius, who’s probably the most famous of the Stoics, he has this line, he says, “The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way.” 

What he really means is that everything that happened, whether it’s a person being rude to you or a flight that's been delayed or a piece of legislation that failed to pass. This is negative in the sense that it's not what you wanted to happen, but it’s positive if you decide that it then provides an opportunity for you to do something, whether that's teach someone something, whether that's even just practicing forgiveness or acceptance. Everything that happens, we had the ability with our minds to change what that means to us. 

Andy Grove, who was the CEO of Intel for many years, he would say, “Bad companies are destroyed by crisis. Good companies survive them, and great companies are improved by them.” That’s sort of the stoic mindset, is that setbacks make some people worse, some people tough it out, and then other people go, “Oh, this is actually great, because now I can do X, Y, or Z.” That's the sort of stoic optimism that I really find inspiring. It's not saying, “Oh, hey! Everything’s awesome,” but it’s saying, “Hey, this presents to me an opportunity to do something that might be awesome, that had things gone my original way, I would've been able to do.” 

[0:14:21.0] MB: Tell me little about in ego, you talked about the distinction between being and doing.

[0:14:27.4] RH: Yeah. We’re really talking about the difference between appearance and reality, or sort of posturing and being the real deal. There's a speech that John Boyd, he was a great fighter pilot, and then sort of a groomer in the talent in the Pentagon for many years. He would give the speech to young up and comers. He would say, “You’re going to come to a fork in the road, and the fork in the road is — ” He would say, “it’s to be or to do.” 

Look, you can be someone who chases rank, he was saying. You could be someone who sucks up to your superior officers. You could be the kind of person that rubber stamps the right projects or tells people what they want to hear, or you could be someone who dedicates himself to the truth to a larger cause, just serving your country in a way that might not be rewarded by rank but it's the right thing to do. 

Boyd’s career was an example of this. I would guess 98% of people listening to this have never heard who he is, but he’s arguably the most important strategist in the Armed Forces in the latter 20th-century. He shepherd through the F-15 and the F-16. He was instrumental in the strategy of the First Gulf War. He’s now taught on all these different war colleges. What he was looking at doing is the right thing. He didn’t care about piss people off. He didn’t care if he killed people’s pet projects. He didn't care if he didn't get promoted. What he cared about was the work, was doing good work. 

I think we all have fork in our own careers that is similar to that. Are you going to be the person who pretends to be an internet millionaire and sells this bogus lifestyle? Are you going to be someone who actually builds something that matters? Are you going to chase being a bestseller, or are you going to chase writing books that have real impact? Are going to chase some meaningless job on Wall Street or are you going to try to make a difference in people's lives? What are you going to do? 

That choice, I think a lot of people make unknowingly. They’re not conscious of that fork, so they just gravitate towards what pays better, what seems to get the most recognition, and then they end up one day wondering where all the time went and why they haven't done anything important. It’s just something that I think everyone needs to be aware of, is what path are you on in life? Are you the person who is being important or you’re doing important things? I think that's the question. 

[0:17:13.3] MB: In many ways that distinction reminded me of the distinction between the fixed mindset and the growth mindset that Carol Dweck talks about, and kind of the idea that if you're sort of in a fixed mindset world that’s all about proving and demonstrating how awesome you are, but when you're sort of in a growth mindset place, in many ways, you're focused on getting better, improving kind of concrete development and growth. 

[0:17:35.0] RH: I guess they’re similar. I don’t know — To me, what Carol Dweck is talking about is the difference between sort of being smart and working hard. If you think you're smart become someone said you're smart, I guess that's one thing. If you think that you work really hard in you’re learning and you’re getting better, one of those attitudes might look better on the surface, but the other attitude — It’s like the other attitude, over time, is going to bear greater fruit. Yeah, you got to decide which of those people you’re going to be. Are you going to chase sort of superficial recognition or are you chase doing real work? 

[0:18:14.0] MB: That makes me think a little bit as well about another concept, I think you call it humbleness in Ego, but it’s the idea of how do we untangle success from our own kind of identity and how do we not fall into the trap of judging people based on their achievements.

[0:18:14.0] RH: Yeah. Look, I think one of the most insidious parts of culture is thinking that the things that we've done say something about us a person good or bad. If you think that the fact that you can afford a nice car says that you’re successful and important, you’re going to feel great when you have that nice car, but if that car gets repossessed, you have to sell it because you’re investing in your company or something. Now, all of a sudden, you don't feel the same way, but you’re the same personal. The only thing that changed is what car you drive. 

If you think that you're doing awesome because your company is doing awesome, what happens when the market shifts, or what happens if Google decides that it's going come into your market and replace you? The realities that the world can sort of turn on a dime. The best laid plans, as we know, can turn to nothing very quickly. 

These things don't change us. The difference between first class and coach on an airline other than price is nothing. They’re just chairs on an airplane, and so you want to be able to measure yourself not by this sort of external scorecard of accomplishment of recognition or achievement. You want to be able to measure yourself based on what went into them, because that’s really the only part of that equation that you control. 

I wrote this new book. I think it’s great. I think it’s one of my best books, but I could die before it comes out or there could be a natural disaster the week out and it could get no recognition, or Malcolm Gladwell could write a book with the same title and no one would care about my book. There are all these things that could happen that before it came out, when it was still in my control, I was quite proud of it and I knew that I did a good job, but then if I let these sort of external metrics decide whether it was good or not, I’ve now taken my confidence and my happiness and my identity and put them out to other people's hands and that sets us up to be disappointed, it sets us up to feel less than. It’s just not a great position to be in. 

[0:20:58.8] MB: How do we anchor our identities and our self-worth on that more stable footing? 

[0:21:04.5] RH: I mean you’ve got to decide what's important to you. Ideally, you want to root it in the things that you control. Again, you take a book — Actually. Obstacle is the Way was a good example. When The Obstacle is the Way came out, it did okay. It’s sold all right, but it was nowhere near what it's become in the subsequent few years. 

If I only felt good about it selling a certain number of copies I would have found that the book was a failure for quite some time. Really, the book hasn't changed. The book is the same book from when I finished it a year before came out to the day it came out, to flash-forward years later and its sold hundreds of thousand copies. Nothing has changed. I haven't changed the words, and the page haven't changed. Those are really what I should be focused on then, what you want your sense of good or bad or positive or negative to be rooted in is the part that you control. I control the amount of work that went into it. I controlled the ideas within it. I controlled the amount of time I made for it. I controlled those things. What I don’t control is what critics say. I don't ultimately control how many copies it’s sold or how much money it makes or this important person or that important person liked it. 

You almost have to be — The stoics would say you’re in different those things. Not that you don’t want them, but it’s nice to have them but you fine if they went away too, but that’s not easy to do. I wasn't exactly happy that the book didn't hit the bestseller list the week it came out or in the weeks’ sense I would've liked for that's to have happened, but that it didn't happen was okay because I was able to root my judgment of the book in the fact that I knew that it was the best thing that I was capable of that that time. 

[0:23:09.0] MB: In Ego you also talked about the idea of entitlement. Tell me a little bit about that. 

[0:23:14.2] RH: I don’t know what you mean specifically, but I think related to what we’re just talking about is a lot of people think they're entitled to the parts of the labor that aren't there. They think that they’re entitled to everyone liking them or everyone telling them that they’re awesome. They're entitled to being in control of the universe, other people's opinions. It's like you see this with very egotistical people. You could even see this with Trump. It’s like he doesn't get that people are allowed to not like him. It’s so deeply bothers him and he’s so used to being in control of everything that he ends up wasting incredible amounts of time and energy and actually ends up making things worse for himself trying to control these things that are inherently outside of his control. 

I think part of ego is just believing that the universe is revolving around you and that it responds to your wants and needs. I think a more humble but more resilient approaches is realizing that, look, you’re a tiny fleck in this universe and that it’s on you to make it what you want it to be within your sort of limitations as a human being. I think this is true as a creative too. Again, get you are entitled to the work. You’re not entitled to what comes to anything past that. You’re not entitled to any results. That's where you are, at the at the mercy of these larger forces. That’s inherently humbling. 

[0:24:50.8] MB: In a world where change is one of the only constants, people and businesses must be adaptable. This episode of the Science of Success is sponsored by our partners at That Moment, a new podcast about the pivot that changes everything. 

Sometimes we recognize the need to seize the moment and change course. Other times, we have no choice but to pivot. Regardless, these moments can bring uncertainty, fear, and the looming possibility of failure, but can also open doors for discovery, growth, and change. 

In each episode of That Moment, people share their stories of taking risks and finding success in business and life. In the latest episode of That Moment, you can hear from the woman who's helping for pivot from a car manufacturing company to a software business, and former FBI agent who's discovered an entirely new approach to fighting cybercrime once he left the bureau. 

Be sure to check out and listen to That Moment wherever you listen to podcasts. 

[0:25:49.4] MB: Do you think that there's — You touched earlier on the idea of stoic optimism. After I kind of read Obstacle, and I’m naturally sort of a very pessimistic person. I always think about all of the things that can go wrong and the ways that it can get wrong. Do you think there's a danger within stoicism of getting too focused on the negative?

[0:26:09.9] RH: The stoics don’t believe in a negative. They’re saying they want to look at all possibilities, but that all the possibilities are the same. That neither there’s no good possibilities and there's no bad possibilities. There's just potential outcomes in a given situation 

I think, look, there’s pessimism. Pessimism is always looking at what could go wrong and then despairing because it can go wrong. Stoic is instead saying, “Look, I'm going to launch this company and it could be successful. It also could fail and I could lose all the money that I put into it, but that’s not going to stop me from trying. I still think that my odds are better of success than failure, so I’m going to push through and I’m going to put everything that I can towards doing so. If it does start to look like it’s going to fail, here are all the things that I can do to prevent that. Here’s all the options that I have since I’ve thought about it in advance that I can try to plan for those contingencies. 

I think there's pessimistic people and I think those people are not happy and there's anxiety and worry in that pessimism. That's not what stoicism is supposed to be about. Stoicism is thinking about the worst case scenario so it doesn't catch you by surprise. Also, so you can plan for it or plan around it or prevent it. The optimism in stoicism is that it proceeds anyway. It proceeds despite the odds or despite the dangers or risks and it goes into them not blindly but with one's eyes wide open. 

[0:28:03.7] MB: I think that's a great point. The idea that there's not good or bad outcomes, there are only outcomes, and we need to think — 

[0:28:10.9] RH: Yeah. The stoics would say there is no good or bad. There's only perception. There's just how we see things. Think about it. Look, what you would see is a bad outcome, somebody else might see as heaven on earth. You failing at a business to someone in the third world, they would kill just to get where you think failure is. These things are all relative and subjective and we should remind ourselves of that. If we can strip that comparison out of the equation, we can see that there are just outcomes, period. Some are probably more desirable than others and some probably present more options than others. At the end of the day, when your company fails, whether you believe in God or whether you believe in some chance or fate, the world isn’t saying, “This is happening to you because it's bad.” It's just happening. It just is an event. When a tree falls or when a person dies or when you get a year older, these are just facts of the universe. They're not good or bad. It's human beings who try to put them in categories and then feel stressed and unhappy because of those categories. 

[0:29:35.0] MB: Where do you think people go wrong when they try to concretely implement stoicism into their lives? 

[0:29:41.9] RH: I say in the book, all these is very simple, but that doesn’t mean that it’s easy. Look, I can say what I just said and 20 minutes from now someone could call me a name and objectively that name is just a word. There's no difference between this word or that word. It doesn't change who you are and it doesn't mean that it's true or not, but that's simple. It’s pretty straightforward. It’s logical, but that in the moment when someone calls you an asshole, that doesn't — You want to react. 

I think the hard work with stoicism is the practice of it, not just the practice, like doing it, but can you practice it? Can this be something that you get a little bit better at every day? I'd like to think that I am, but stuff still bothers me. It's always going to bother me, but hopefully it bothers me a little bit less every day. 

[0:30:44.1] MB: I’d love to kind of transition now in talking about your new book, The Perennial Seller. One of the core ideas from the book is the notion that you shouldn't distinguish between the making of something in the marketing of it. Tell me about that. 

[0:30:58.9] RH: I think a lot of people creatively — and I know this sounds very different than what sort of the important topics we’re just talking about, but I’ve tried to write books that are going to stand the test of time. I’ve tried to write books that whether or not they appear on the bestseller list are going to sell well every single week. I want to create things that last, that help people that work regardless of trends or current events. Part of the reason that a lot of creative work doesn't do that is that people go off in a cave and they make things and then they try to figure out after how to make. Somebody decides, “I want to have a podcast, “and then they make a podcast and then they go, “How do I get listeners for this podcast?” They don't think about it as —They think about it as separate problems rather than the same problem and that in a weird way getting the audience, sort of getting the attention for it matters as much, if not more than how you made it, because if you can't have one, the effort that went into the other was somewhat poorly spent. 

[0:32:12.5] MB: I think that makes a ton of sense, and you have a couple of examples from the books Shawshank Redemption, 48 Laws of Power. Would you share one of those stories? 

[0:32:22.3] RH: Yeah. Look, Robert Greene who wrote the 48 Laws of Power, he was my mentor. I was his research assistant for a number of years. Look, that book could've been — That book was written in the mid-90s. That book could have been rooted in current events. It could have talked about the Clintons. It could have talked about no television shows that were on at that time. It could've talk about all of these things, but instead Robert wrote a very timeless book about power. He wrote a book about power that wasn't designed for your typical business executive. It was very pragmatic and ruthless and he says that it's A-moral, meaning that it's not judging good or bad about the strategies. The result was he’s created this timeless book that’s unlike anything else in the field. Its closest equivalent is probably Machiavelli's, The Prince, just written 500 years before. 

In a way, he’s done very little marketing for the book because the book is the marketing. When people read, it so refreshingly provocative and bold that you got to read this book. The book is the marketing in many ways and it's also designed to be timeless. Again, even though it’s 20 years old, it doesn't feel dated. He could've written it yesterday, he could have written it 20 years from. It would still be the same value. 

Part of the reason I rooted my books in ancient philosophy is that I know that I’ve thought about the things that I’ve thought for a decade or two decades. I know that ancient philosophy has worked for thousands of years. What am I going to bet on? Something that occurred to me when I was 25, or am I going to bet on something that somebody else came up with 2500 years ago? Rotting your work in timeless principles is really really important. 

[0:34:26.6] MB: You were pretty young when Robert Greene, I guess, when he became your mentor, right? 

[0:34:32.1] RH: Yeah, I was 19 or 20. 

[0:34:34.9] MB: How did you develop that relationship or how did he become your mentor at such a young age? 

[0:34:41.3] RH: I think become is the operative word there. There wasn't like this day where I was anointed. It wasn't like some ceremony or swearing-in. I worked for someone who works on his website and then Robert and I started talking. I started working on his projects. I had read all his books. We met for lunch one time. He told me that he was looking for a research assistant. I volunteered. He gave me a trial project and then I did good on that and he gave me another project. Then over five or six years, I proved myself. I did good work. It was an organic growing process. There was never — I think some people go, “I need to find a mentor,” and that’s not really how it works. What you need his mentoring, and that can come from lots of different sources and people and it usually evolves slowly. 

I think the other part is when you begin to show potential or talent — If you're totally clueless and you don’t know anything and you have no marketable skills of any kind, you're not going to find a mentor. In some ways, it's inherently unfair, the people who need mentoring the most get it the least, but that's how it works. 

Sheryl Sandberg, she says it’s not find a mentor and you will do well. Do well and a mentor will find you. That's how it happens. You’ve got to put in the work, show the potential and then people will be willing to invest in you. 

[0:36:17.5] MB: Back to Perennial Seller, tell me a little bit about how do you approach the creative process? 

[0:36:24.5] RH: I think about the audience a lot about. I think about who am I making this for. I think about what is this project going to do. What am I trying to accomplish? What is success look like on this project? It's a hell of a lot of work too. When I sold Perennial Seller in early 2015, I thought it would take a few months. Here, it is coming out in late 2017. Took over two years, and not like two years of sporadic work, but two years of almost every day making it a little bit better. 

I think people think that books or movies or whatever, these sort of flashes of inspiration or flurries of activity. Really, it’s you have an idea and you test that idea. You start to think that there's some promise to it, and then he does work on it every single day and it gets .01% better each time you touch it and these improvements compound and at the end, probably much later than you think, it's eventually finished and you have it. 

[0:37:39.7] MB: How do you go about testing your ideas? 

[0:37:42.6] RH: I say every article should be — Every book should be an article before it's a book. Every article should be a dinner conversation before it’s an article. I think you’ve got to interact with people who are least representative of your audience and see is there a potential? Is there a flash or a glint of intrigue in their eyes when they hear it? If there's not, then you got to keep tweaking the idea until you get there. 

[0:38:13.0] MB: Give me a specific example. How did the Perennial Seller, for example, evolved from a dinner conversation into an article into eventually a book? 

[0:38:24.4] RH: Yeah, it’s funny. My editor came to my wedding and she was like, “Hey, you should do a book on book marketing.” I thought that was interesting, and I explored it. I wrote a book proposal and sold. There was some interest, obviously, or they wouldn't have bought it. Then I started talking to people about a book and I found — Most of the people I know are not authors, so the idea of a book about book marketing, it kept falling flat. Then I realized too that a lot of the strategies that I was going talk about would be out of date very soon, and so I pivoted towards, generally, how do you make anything that lasts or how do you market anything that lasts. 

Then most of that marketing actually has to do with what the product is itself, so then it was really hard to make and market anything that last. Obviously, I had to sit down and write it and there are heir different sections that I talk to people about, but it evolved from this suggestion about one topic to being a full-fledged book of — I don’t know, 50,000 or 60,000 words, maybe more, about a totally different thing. That wouldn't have happened — If I just written the book — Let's say I had known that my publisher would publish anything that I wrote, so I would have thrown together a first draft about book marketing, and then it would have been published and it would've been much worse and it would’ve had much less chance of success that I not had this conversation. I thought I not got pushed back from the people that I did talk to it about. 

[0:40:10.5] MB: For somebody who’s listening, how would you recommend that they think about finding a market or an audience for their ideas or for that sort of concept that they have around creating something? 

[0:40:25.0] MB: I would think what are problems that people have that need solutions? I think that far too much creative work is a solution in search of a problem, when really it's got to be the other way around. What’s a problem that people have? The Obstacle is the Way is a book about philosophy, because that’s what I'm interested in, but it’s actually a book about how to overcome obstacles, because that's what other people are interested in to come together. 

You have to find a problem to solve, and the deeper and more perennial problem and the better your solution, the more likely you are to create something that's going to endure and that's going to be, hopefully, financially lucrative as well. 

[0:41:13.8] RH: How do you approach digging in and really discovering kind of what those problems are or finding people that kind of unearthing what the challenges they have that you could maybe help talk to or address? 

[0:41:28.5] RH: To me it’s kind of obvious. What are problems you have in your own life that other people share? What are problems the people in your life seem to talk about? What are the things that you wish you'd known when you were younger? What’s the thing that you went through that you had to white knuckle, that you wish that there had been solutions for? What are the things that you're experiencing in your life? You're not pulling up a phone book and trying to call people and go, “What are some problems that you have?” but you're looking for resistance and difficulty that other people have accepted or have caught up with that there might be a solution to. What did people sang before there was the song Happy Birthday? What people read before what to expect when you're expecting? Where did people go to when they would get hung over in the weekends and before there was a brunch spots? What are needs that people have to which there are currently no solutions? Then your work is presented as an alternative to the status quo. 

[0:42:39.3] MB: If you were to have to kind of start from scratch today, if you had no existing audience, no relationships. How would you go about building an audience or building a platform for yourself? 

[0:42:51.9] RH: Look, I remember when I did that. It's not like that — I wasn't gifted this platform. I remember in 2008 or 2009 I wanted to be an author and I knew I would write a book someday, but I didn’t have any way to tell people about it. I started an email lists where recommended books to people thinking that one day I might be able to recommend one of my own books. That list started with 50 people that are mostly friends, and I sent the email out last night about Perennial Seller to 81 — Almost 82,000 people. I already did that list, so when other people started reading lists, I don't think it’s a good idea. I think that’s competition and I sort of already own that space, but I would think about what is a skill that I have? What’s something that I know about I could help people with? What's the most interesting thing about me that people don't know about that I could lean into? I’d go from there. It wasn’t like 30 years ago I started from scratch. It was not that long ago. I still think I’m very much in the in the beginning stages of doing the things that we’re talking about. 

[0:44:09.7] MB: In the book, you talk about the importance of building a platform. Can you explain that concept a little bit more? 

[0:44:17.3] RH: Look, what we’re just talking about with the list. I could have built a blog, but I built an email list instead, and that email list is now 80,000 people, that when I have a book, I email. The email is probably this single best medium for selling books right now. 

If you don't collect your fans and organize them and have direct access to them, like you, with your podcast, if you were only dependent on iTunes to get access to your fans and iTunes suddenly decided to charge, or iTunes mysteriously shut down, or people started hating iTunes. These would all be really bad problems. If you’re an Uber driver, you're dependent on Uber for your living. You don't have a platform. Uber has the platform, and that's why they're worth billions of dollars. You want to own your relationship with your customers, your fans, as much as possible. 

[0:45:09.3] MB: Has having children impacted your productivity at all? What have been some of the challenges you’ve had to overcome in terms of staying on track with how much you create and market with having kids? 

[0:45:22.5] RH: I only have one son and he’s less than nine months old. The vast majority of my creative work came before all these and it’s certainly a process that I'm adjusting to now. Look, you got to decide what you want your life to look. You got to decide what your priorities are, what's important to you, and you got to organize around that. I think one of the reasons that I was comfortable having a kid is that I’d gotten my life to a point where there was freedom to do that and that had been something that was always very important. I didn't want to have to show up at a job. I wanted to have to determine my own schedule. I wanted to be somewhat financially independent as a result of some of my success. I changed tell how I spent money, how I invested money. That this change what I said yes to, what I said no to. It certainly changes your priority. There's a few hours that I spend in the morning now that before I get started that weren’t there before, but I think the rewards are more than worth it. 

[0:46:30.0] MB: What’s one of the hardest struggles that you’ve personally had to overcome? 

[0:46:36.7] RH: I kind of hate that question, because, one, I think it implies — One; i don't like this idea of this sort of the adversity Olympics. Who has gone through this, and was gone through that, and let's all compare them? I think the other part of it is that it implies that it's like this thing we do ones that determines who we are. 

To me, the struggle is waking up every day and being tired and you’d go to work or not. There’s this fire to put out or that that fire to put out, or this employee has this problem and how are you going to deal with it? To me, the struggle is this sort of day-to-day thing that I focus on. At the end of the day, I don’t think about it anymore. I don't think about —2014, I wrote about Ego. It was a very hard year for me. I went through a lot of stuff, but I also don't think about it at all. Part of the reason I wrote it is so I don't have to think about it again. Part of the stoic optimism is also realizing the time you spent dwelling on the past either negatively or positively. Patting yourself on the back for getting through something is really just wasted time is not being directed at what you’re going to do next. That's where I prefer to focus my energy. 

[0:47:55.6] MB: I think that’s a great point and a very insightful look at how to think about not only where we focus our attention, but why it's kind of irrelevant to think about just what’s the hardest struggle that you’ve had overcome. I think that’s really interesting perspective and philosophy. 

[0:48:15.1] RH: Thank you. 

[0:48:15.7] MB: For somebody who's listening to this episode that maybe wants to start or concretely implement some of the ideas we’ve talked about today, what would kind of be one action or activity you’d give them as a starting point to do that? 

[0:48:29.2] RH: Obviously, I wrote the books to be a starting point and I see them very much as a starting point. The point of stoic philosophy is not that it’s this thing that you read ones and then you know forever and you’re this magical wizard. It's something you read and you do. I journal about it daily. I write about it. I think about it. I read about it. I have conversations about it. 

The books, for me, are part of that process. Writing them was me spending an incredible amount of time with some of these ideas. I would start with reading, and you don't have to read my books. You could read Marcus Aurelius, or Seneca. Tim Ferris just put out a free collection of Seneca’s letters that i think are great. You could check out that. Listen to podcast about it. I would just start by immersing yourself in this information because there’s a lot of it out there. It’s done by people who are smarter than you, they’re smarter than me. These are people, some of the wisest people who ever lived, and I take advantage of it. 

[0:49:31.3] MB: I would echo that as well. I think that one of the most interesting things about your work, and you touched on this earlier, is that these ideas are timeless. They’ve been around for, literally, thousands of years and there's a reason, it's because they’re such effective strategies for dealing with, as you put it, sort of the everyday struggle of getting up, dealing with setbacks, achieving things in a world that is often very difficult. 

[0:49:56.8] RH: Yeah. I would agree with that. 

[0:49:58.2] MB: Where can people find you and your books online? 

[0:50:02.1] RH: My websites is ryanholiday.net. You could sign up for the reading list we talked about there. All my books are on Amazon. Yeah, I think I’m at Ryan Holiday on pretty much every social media platform. 

[0:50:13.7] MB: Awesome. Ryan, thank you so much for coming on here sharing all of your wisdom, ton of great insights about stoicism and creativity. 

[0:50:22.5] RH: Thank you for having me. This is really cool. 

[0:50:24.6] MB: Thank you so much for listening to The Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story, or just say hi. Be sure to shoot me an email. My email is matt@successpodcast.com. I would love to hear from you and I read and respond to every listener email.

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes, because that helps more and more people discover The Science of Success. I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all these information?” Because of that, we’ve created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. You can get it by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222, or by going to successpodcast.com, that’s successpodcast.com and joining our email list. 

If you want to get all the incredible information we just talked about; links, transcripts, everything in the show and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Go to successpodcast.com and hit the show notes button at the top. 

Thanks again, and we’ll see you on the next episode of The Science of Success.


July 20, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
KevinKelly-01.png

Human Innovation, Artificial Intelligence, and the Uncertain Future of Cyber Warfare with WIRED's Kevin Kelly

July 06, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss the inevitable technology shifts that will be impacting our future, the second industrial revolution, the importance of having an open mind, critical thinking and seeking dis-confirming evidence, we explore how to ask better questions (and why it’s so important that you do), and talk about some of the biggest technology risks with Kevin Kelly.

Kevin Kelly is the Senior Maverick and Co-Founder of Wired Magazine. Kevin is also the co-founder of The All Species Foundation, which seeks to catalogue and identify every living species on earth as well as The Rosetta Project, building an archive of ALL documented human language and much much more. He is a New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestselling author of several books including The Inevitable: Understanding the 12 Technological Forces That Will Shape Our Future, his work has been featured in Forbes, Smithsonian, and more!

We discuss:

  • The 12 inevitable forces that are shaping the future of humanity and our lives

  • How the physics of the “technological” terrain make tectonic technological shifts INEVITABLE and what you can do about it

  • Why cars, telephones, light bulbs, and the internet were also “inevitable"

  • Evolution keeps trying to make “minds” - is AI the next attempt?

  • How we are “cognifying" the world around us and what that means

  • How we will fill the world with a zoo of possible minds that think differently

  • AI will become a commodity like electricity - it will be a utility that anyone can get or use

  • What can I do with 1000 minds (like 1000 horsepower) working on a problem

  • The second industrial revolution and how it will impact our entire society

  • How our lack of understanding of intelligence currently hinders our ability to truly understand what makes intelligence

  • You can’t optimize every dimension - there will always be trade-offs

  • How much of today’s technology is akin to “flapping wings” versus artificial flight using fixed wings

  • The chief asset for innovation and wealth generation in this new economy is being able to THINK differently

  • How do we focus our attention in a world with such infinite possibilities of things to do and focus on?

  • How do we battle against fake news, alternative facts, and the temptation to only filter information we want to hear?

  • In the future - we may have to teach the “literacy” of filtering and understanding information as Kevin calls it “techno literacy”or “critical thinking”

  • The vital importance of being open to having your mind changed - and how travel can be a tool to do that

  • Why you should allow yourself to be challenged by other views

  • Why asking great questions will be one of the most valuable skillsets and assets in the future

  • How we can start to ask better questions right now

  • There are no dumb questions - never be afraid to ask if you don’t understand - and then really listen for the answer

  • Why we should use lateral thinking to approach a question or challenge from a completely different angle - how we ask a question that has never been asked before

  • How you can believe you are a martian and ask questions as if you were a machine and you didn’t know all the things humans normally know

  • Don’t be afraid of obvious questions

  • Why Kevin describes himself as a “protopian” - technology produces as many new problems as it solves. Progress is real even though technology creates additional problems

  • The technology trend that Kevin Kelly is most afraid of and thinks is the biggest risk to humanity

  • What would Kevin say to someone who doesn’t think that these technological forces are inevitable?

  • Why AI is often defined as “that which we can’t do”

  • AI is going to impact all areas of our lives - buy some AI from google tensor flow and start fooling around with it - see what happens

  • Be a tinkerer - don’t be afraid to play with and try new technology

  • And much more!

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Personal Site] Kevin Kelly

  • [Amazon Author Page] Kevin Kelly

  • [Book] The Inevitable by Kevin Kelly

  • [Twitter] Kevin Kelly

  • [Website] Recomendo

Episode Transcript

 [00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.
 
[0:00:12.6] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performers tick with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.
 
In this episode, we discuss the inevitable technology shift that will be impacting our future; the second Industrial Revolution. The importance of having an open mind, critical thinking and seeking disconfirming evidence. We explore how to ask better questions and why it's so important that you do and talk about some of the biggest technology risks with Wired's Kevin Kelly.
 
The Science of Success continues to grow with more than a million downloads, listeners in over 100 countries, hitting number one in New and Noteworthy, and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time asking me, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all these incredible information?” A lot of listeners are curious how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge I get some reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to awesome podcasts and more. 
 
Because of that, we’ve created an epic resource just for you; a detailed guide called How To Organize and Remember Everything, and you can get it completely for free by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, it's a guide we created called How To Organize and Remember Everything. All you have to do to get it is to text the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or visit successpodcast.com and join our email list. 
 
In our previous episode, we discussed the experience trap and why someone who's been doing their job for 20 or 30 years may be no better and sometimes even worse than someone who has very little experience. We look at the shocking truth behind 35 years of research that reveals what separates world-class performers from everybody else. We talked about how talent is overrated, misunderstood, and research says it doesn't even exist, and we go deep on the critically important concept of deliberate practice and much more with our guest, Geoff Colvin. If you want to uncover the secret behind what makes world-class performers so talented, listen to that episode. 
 
Lastly, if you want to get all the incredible information to this show; links, transcripts, everything we’re going to talk about, and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to successpodcast.com and the show notes button at the top. 
 
[0:02:48.5] MB: Today, we have another amazing guest on the show; Kevin Kelly. Kevin is the senior maverick and cofounder of Wired Magazine. He’s also cofounder of the All Species Foundation which seeks to catalog and identify every living species on earth as well as The Rosetta Project, building an archive of all documented human language and much more. 
 
His New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestselling author of several books including The Inevitable: Understanding The 12 Technological Forces That Will Shape Our Future. His work has been featured in Forbes, the Smithsonian much more.
 
Kevin, welcome to the Science of Success. 
 
[0:03:24.7] KK: Hey, it’s my honor and privilege for being here. Thanks for inviting me. 
 
[0:03:27.5] MB: We’re very excited to have you on today. I‘d love to start out, I'm sure many listeners are kind of familiar with you and your story. Tell us a little bit about the premise for the new book; The Inevitable and kind of what really drove you to write it. 
 
[0:03:43.1] KK: The book in brief is a projection of the next 20 to 30 years in, mostly, digital technology and what those long-term trends may look like. I don't try to predict the specifics in any way. This is much more of a kind of all things being equal. This is how it's going to lean in these directions. There are roughly 12 interrelated directions, they’re kind of all leaning in one large direction, but these 12 forces you could think of them as — These 12 forces are things that are going kind of happen kind of no matter what we do. There's still plenty of decisions we have to make in terms of the character of these specifics. 
 
The short version of the book is I’m suggesting that we embrace some of these things which sound a little scary, like artificial intelligence, virtual reality, that we embrace these in order to steer them, in order to form them into the versions that we want and a future that's friendly for us. 
 
[0:04:52.0] MB: Obviously, the title kind of implies this. Tell me more about the inevitability of many of these forces. Why are they inevitable and why does that make it so important that we embrace them? 
 
[0:05:04.0] KK: The inevitability is a soft version that comes from the very physics or the material world that they’re all made from. Maybe kind of a way to think about this is imagine kind of a rain falling down a valley, the direction or the path of a particular raindrop as it hits the hillside and it finds its way down is completely unpredictable, but the general direction is known. It's down. It’s going to go down no matter what. 
 
This direction comes from the kind of the physics of the entire terrain. A lot of technologies really bound by the physics and I think once you have invented electric wires and switches and stuff, you’re going to come upon the idea of telephones, inevitably. We know that because there were hundreds of people working on it. Edison was a 32nd inventor of the electrical light bulb because it was inevitable. 
 
While the electrical light was inevitable, the particular bulb was not. While telephone was inevitable, the iPhone was not. The internet, what happened once you have the telephone, Twitter or Facebook are not inevitable. The particulars can change and they have decisions about whether something is a national or international, whether it's open or close, commercial or nonprofit. All these different characters of these technologies which have their inevitability built into the physics are something that we have. 
 
Natural evolution tried to make again and again — It makes flapping wings, because that's a very good solution. It makes four-legged animals, quadrupeds, because it's a natural solution that things arrive again and again given our gravity and so we extend the in the technological realm with making four wheels. Four wheeled vehicles are kind of inevitable. Of course, the Lamborghini is not. 
 
The kinds of forces I'm talking about, like artificial intelligence, virtual realities, these come about because as we make technology, this is a pattern things want to fall into because they're naturally inclined body by physics to go in a direction. However, the particulars companies, the particular products, none of those are at all something we can predict. 
 
[0:07:39.5] MB: You had a really good example looking or using the examples of electrification and then kind of demonstrating how that describes cognification. Can you explain that analogy and also talk about a little bit what cognification is or what it means to be cognified. 
 
[0:07:57.3] KK: One of the things that evolution has made, invented, created again and again in many different classes and kingdoms of life is mind. It keeps trying to make minds. We’re making minds and we’re putting little slivers of smartness into everything we make or making some things very very smart. That making things smarter, we don’t really have a good English word, so I use cognify. We’re cognifying this cognification process. It happens again and again and some things we’re cognify to a very larger extent. We call those artificial intelligences. 
 
This cognification process is going to lead to many different types of cognifying, cognification. There’s many different modes, many different subroutines in our minds, our own brains, a suite of portfolio of dozens of different types of cognition from perception, to inductive reasoning, to symbolic reasoning, arithmetic, emotional intelligence, spatial navigation. These are all different modes of thinking and we have as very complicated suite symphony of different notes. 
 
The artificial minds we make, some of them would be very simple with just a few of those types of thinking, like your calculator is smarter than you are in arithmetic right now. Your phone is sort of a better spatial navigation than most of us are naturally. 
 
We’re going to fill the world thousands of different species of thinking, like a zoo of possible minds. Most of these will be very different than humans. They’ll think differently, and I’m suggesting that that’s going to be their chief benefit, is that they think differently than we do and so we will work with them to solve problems. The best chess player in the planet today is not an AI, it’s an AI plus a human because they’re complementary kinds of intelligences. 
 
As we make this cognification, as we employ it, deploy it, we’re going to do something very similar to what we did during the Industrial Revolution which is that we’re going to disperse it on a grid, like an electrical grid which send out artificial power to every household, every farm, every factory. This new artificial power allowed anybody to harness this artificial power and curate things that no muscle power, no natural muscle power could create, throwing up skyscrapers, or extending railways across the continent, generating or producing cloth by the mile, shoes by the pile. 
 
This natural artificial power was distributed on this grid and now we’re going to take the artificial intelligence and we’re going to distribute on a grid called the cloud and it will become a commodity like electricity. It will be a utility that anybody can get and use and you can use it to make whatever you want a little smarter in some dimension. That ability will produce hundreds, if not hundreds of thousands of new startups, new inventions. 
 
People will ask themselves, “What can I do with a thousand minds, not human minds, but a thousand minds working on a problem just like [inaudible 0:11:51.6] evolutions, say, “What can I do with 250 horse power, 250 horses? What can I do with that?” You can do all kinds of things with it that we couldn’t do before. What can we do with 250 minds working on a problem day and night? That’s the second Industrial Revolution, is going to impact everything from sports, fashion, religion, entertainment, military education, business, the whole nine yards and not tomorrow, but within the 20 or 30 year horizon. 
 
However, tomorrow, today, you can buy some AI from Google or Microsoft and you can start playing around with it, just like the early tinkers and Edison’s of the world were playing around electricity. You’ll discover some of the easy, low-hanging fruit that are going to be available that won’t take that many hours to discover just as the early guys hacking electricity discovered so many things in their early days. 
 
[0:12:58.0] MB: You touched on the idea that these artificial intelligence is in many cases are going to think different or have almost artificial or alien forms of intelligence that are completely different and yet complementary to human intelligence. Tell me more about that. 
 
[0:13:14.6] KK: In general, we have no idea what intelligence is in humans are otherwise. We don’t even know what animal intelligence really is. We are ignorant about what we’re trying to do. In fact, one of the byproducts of the AI revolution will be that artificial intelligence will become a telescope, a Microscope that will allow us to figure out what our own intelligence is, because we have difficulty experimenting on these, but by making thousands of different varieties and breaking them in so many ways, we’ll find out what it is. 
 
Right now, today, we have no idea what this is, but we do know that it’s not a single dimension that the intelligence is a complicated process of many different types of thinking. Even if they may run on a similar matrix of the neurons, the organization, the way that the data is organized is different. We will use those differences to engineer intelligences that we’re going to optimize certain things that we want done, like maybe it’s a proof of scientific theorems. Maybe it’s just as a speech listener, maybe it’s to have conversations, maybe it’s to figure out trajectories of a rocket. 
 
All these things can be optimized for very individual type applications. There’ll be ones that we’ll consider more general purpose but they can’t be — You can’t optimize everything. That’s the kind of engineering maximums that whatever system you are, is you can’t optimize every single dimension. There’s always going to be tradeoffs. Some of these new kinds of minds we make, we may actually invent a whole new type of thinking that does not exist in nature just as we did with flying. When we invented artificial flying, we studied the animals; bats, and insects, and birds, and they all flapped their wings. All of the initial attempts of flying were flapping wings, which works well. 
 
When we finally invented artificial flying we invented a type of flying which does not exist in nature, which is a fixed wing with propeller. We’ll probably do the same thing. We’ll probably uncover some types of cognition that don’t exist in the natural biological world and we’ll be able to do those in Silicon. They will be different than our minds. All these varieties, this is due, will vary tremendously. In many cases, the fact that they think differently is their chief asset because in the connected world they were operating in this new economy. The chief asset for innovation and wealth to our nation is being able to think differently. 
 
As more of us are connected, when we get to the point where we have five billion people connected all the time, 24 hours a day, thinking differently, actually becomes difficult because we have basically a group mind. Having artificial intelligence that think differently will help us to maintain and think differently while we’re connected to everybody else. There’s a double advantage to having AI’s that think differently than humans. 
 
[0:16:52.2] MB: That makes me think about one of the other forces that you talk about, which is this idea of filtering. In a world where we increasingly have so many things competing for our attention, how do we use technology to filter out and really focus on the most important things? 
 
[0:17:11.4] KK: I think this is the right place to start, which is that if you graph or start to measure the number of creative products that our society at large, the human species is producing, it’s mind-numbing. Even the number of new songs that are written and produced every year, the number of new books, not just even in English, but worldwide, or the number of videos, the number of new products that are available for sale. It’s overwhelming and way, way beyond what any one person could attend to. 
 
Even if you had a filter, which is what we’re talking about, some filter that would take away all the crap, which is most of the stuff. There’s still way too much good stuff even to list and pay attention to. Let alone, to try out or enjoy. 
 
As technology — through technology, we’re creating this avalanche of stuff so we need technological help to actually sort through it. We’re going to have levels and levels of this and there’s kind of no escape. A lot of people feel maybe the solution is just to turn it all off, all these filters go naked, be real. No. There are problems introduced by filters, but the problems introduced can only be really offset by yet other levels of filtering and looking at things and helping us to navigate through. 
 
Recommendation engines and the algorithmic connections that filter are, are necessary for us to navigate through this in any sense at all. There are some problems, and computer sciences call it over-fitting. If you are really only seeing things that you know you already like and you kind of get stuck on this local pique of optimization that prevents you from really seeing really great stuff because you’re too fit to what you specified and you aren’t broad enough to really something wider and better. 
 
We need all kinds of tricks, devices, additional technologies that can search lighter, that can actually change our taste, that actually can help us grow, that can help us see when we’re being blinded by our own likes. There’s lots of levels. Of course, now, we have the new challenge of a fake news and alternative facts where some of these filters have introduced polarization, it introduced kind of a blindness. 
 
We, again, need to have additional layers of truth signaling layer where things can be assigned, a kind of a networked consensus on the probability of their being true, some kind of confidence level, like, “This fact here has a 95% change of being reliable, true, based on these sources, based on the many other sources that we also trust that have a hard trust value that trust it.” You have this kind of a citation index and like page rank. 
 
These things are all additional levels that we’re going to bring in and if it becomes even more complicated, it’s never going to become simpler and we will maybe require an education to learn how to use it. You and I and all your listeners have spent four years, at least, learning how to read and write. It was not easy. We just didn’t absorb it by being around books. Some of these kind of stuff of learning how to use, being aware of, how to be literate in social media or filtering news, critical reading. These may be a literacy that we actually have to teach people and they may have to spend some years in learning how to become good at it. 
 
We shouldn’t necessarily expect that people can just sort of learn how to navigate through this stuff without any kind of disciplined practice. It’s not going to become easier. It’s going to become ever more complicated.  
[0:21:53.5] MB: I think that’s such a vital challenge and something — Part of the kind of reason that we even do this podcast is to teach people, help enlighten people and talk people about seeking disconfirming evidence and things that are kind of outside their comfort zone and really looking at the data and the science of trying to figure out what is actually true and what is real. 
 
[0:22:16.3] KK: I’ll consider that illiteracy, and that kind of techno-literacy maybe is what I would call it, is something that may have many dimensions including the critical thinking that you’re talking about. That may be something that we actually have to teach. 
 
[0:22:31.8] MB: I think that’s a great idea. It’s fascinating, and that’s one of the problems I wanted to ask you about was how do we solve this, as you called it sort of over-fitting where everyone lives in essentially a bubble that is self-reinforcing of only information that they want and only information that they like. 
 
[0:22:49.6] KK: One of the reasons I travel a lot is for that very reason. It forces me into otherness. It forces me to be confronted with different world views, different point of view. I allow myself no escape from it. It’s visceral, it’s full-body, and there’s certainly ways to travel where you’re isolated. Again, I’m going for the raw and the remote and I’m allowing myself to have my mind changed. I think I recommend that highly particularly for young people as a means to begin that habit of trying to see the world from a different point of view of allowing yourself to be challenged by other views which may be the majority in the places that you lined up in. 
 
That’s, for me, a surefire way to do that and I think it’s so important for young people that I think we should, as a nation, subsidize it in the form of monetary, two-year national service where you have your choice to serve in the military or the Peace Corps or some kind of service organization for three years without exceptions, including oversees somewhere and it would radically the tenure of our country, besides the fact that you’re missing up with people that you didn’t grow up with. You’re also mixing up with people that are far outside of your own prejudices.  
 
[0:24:41.8] MB: You also talk in the book about questioning and how as many of these technologies forces reshape society. One of the most important skillsets is going to be the ability to ask great questions. 
 
[0:24:54.8] KK: Yeah, I think 30 years, if you want an answer, you’re going to ask a machine. Machines will have very very good answers. They’re getting ever smarter, ever more knowledgeable. They’ll be more conversational. Just as we kind of like — I don’t know. I don’t remember to spell things. I just ask Google, it tells me the correct way to spell stuff. We’re going to rely on it for information, facts, and those nature of answers. It’s going to be a long time before these things; AIs, robots, can ask good questions, because a good question requires a very broad common sense education perspective, and that’s sort of what we want to actually breed and teach in schools is being able to ask good questions, because in some sense, both science and innovation are fundamentally ways of asking questions, like what if. They’re explorations. They’re not concerned about efficiency. They’re very inefficient in processes that entail sometimes wasting time and having failures because you have dead ends. You have things that don’t work. 
 
That nature of investigation questioning requires the broadest sense of being and is the most productive in the long-term because that’s where the new things come from this, where empathy comes. That’s where our sense of vision all derive from. Teaching how to do that is — Naturally, some people are better than others, but everybody can be taught to be a little bit better at it. I think that’s one of the several key things besides what we’re just talking about; techno-literally, that you want to teach in schools rather than how to regurgitate answers, which is sort of the industrial model. 
 
[0:26:56.4] MB: How do you think we can — Maybe as a simple starting point, how could somebody who’s listening to this show start to ask better questions? 
 
[0:27:05.8] KK: It’s a great question. There you go, you asked a good question. I think one thing I learned — I had kind of a rocky relationship with school. I was a real science-math nerd, but my method of operation was very simple. I sat up front and I was a guy who asked all the stupid questions that people felt that they had, they want to ask but were too embarrassed, but I would ask, because I have no embarrassment at all about asking questions. Basically, if I don’t understand, I figured nobody also understands. That’s basically what an editor, what I’m doing when I’m editing a piece for, like Wired, is like, “Look, if I don’t understand it, the reader is not going to understand it.” 
 
One of the suggestions I’m kind of pointing to is there are no dumb questions, really. If you ask it in sincerity and if you’re not being dumb. If you’re really struggling with understanding something, don’t be afraid to ask the question, because likely, if you’re having problems, so are other people. Then, really, listen. That’s the difference. 
 
There are no real dumb questions. Secondly, a good question is one that generates not just an answer, but other good questions from it. I would just say, there’s a lateral thinking that’s very productive which is to approach the question, to approach the subject from a different angle. While you shouldn’t be afraid to ask the stupid question, you should also be trying to think about a question that hasn’t been asked before. That’s a little harder to do. That requires a little bit more work. There are several tricks. 
 
I hang around Marvin Minsky, the great AI guru t MIT for a long time. He had a remarkable way of asking questions. After observing him, I’m pretty sure that what it was is he believed that he was like a Martian. That he wasn’t a human, or that he was a robot or something. He was just not human. He would ask the questions as if he was a machine and that he didn’t know all the things that humans knew. That was refreshing and infuriating at the same time, but he got to ask really great questions because he was coming from this other angle. 
 
Another person I know of; Brian Eno, who’s the rock star, does the same thing. He adopted some point of view where he’s going to ask the question as if he’s not just another Englishman somewhere. He’s coming from an alien point of view which enables him to bring a different insight to it. That would be maybe my second suggestion, is don’t be afraid of obvious questions, but also try and ask a question as if you were standing form a different place than most people are standing. 
 
[0:30:20.5] MB: Those are both great suggestions, and I agree. Along the same lines of kind of the concept, as you called it techno-literacy, I think the ability to ask great questions is another skill set that is really worthwhile to cultivate. I’m curious, out of the various forces you described, what changes do you see coming down the pike that you’re most scared of and why? 
 
[0:30:43.4] KK: That’s a good question. I want to make it clear that I’m not a utopian. I am not a dystopian. I’m a protopian, meaning that I believe that technology produces almost as many new problems as it solves and the new problems it solves, the solutions to those are additional new technologies which will produce new problems, but that what we get from that cycle is a tiny, minute improvement of a few percent per year that’s compounded over centuries that become civilization and progress, so that progress is real even though it’s very very slight. That’s what I call protopia progress. It’s propelling forward. 
 
There are tons of new things that are coming about and tons of things to worry about if you want to worry. One of my concerns about these new technologies is what we’re seeing actually, there’s a great example today, which is cyber war, cyber conflict. Today, as we’re speaking, there was a malware attack in Ukraine that kind of shutdown the country. I think we’re just seeing the beginning of this. Our society is so dependent on this stuff that it is very susceptible to disruption. 
 
I think the likelihood of the entire internet falling down is really hard to do and it’d be really hard to engineer even if you had the assignment. That there’s going to be sicknesses, ailments, injuries, local injuries all the time. My real fear is not those kind of what we might call ordinary injuries, but a cyber-war conflict, state to state, because we don’t have a consensus right now on what’s acceptable in this new realm. We have lots of treaties and agreements about conventional warfare. It seems odd that we have rules for war, but that’s better than no rules. We don’t have them in any real operational way with the cyber conflict, and when we introduced artificial intelligence to it, it’s even going to be amplified up even more. 
 
My fear is that there’ll be some really bad thing that will happen. Before there’s an agreement, “No, we don’t want that to happen.” Right now, is it okay for cyber things to take down the banking system somewhere? Is it okay to work in hospital on hospitals computers. The answer is that there’s not an agreement, because the major states involved in this; U.S., Russia, China, maybe Israel, Iran, Korea, North Korea, none of these states were even acknowledging that they’re doing this and there’s all deniability and it’s very hard to ascertain what’s really going on. 
 
Until there’s some really widespread agreement that, “No, this is not permissible,” I think that that which is not permissible will happen and it doesn’t have to be that way, but I’m not sure what will it take, what would have to happen before there’d be some agreements that this happens before disaster strikes, but that’s my current fear. 
 
[0:34:19.6] MB: It seems like in many ways — As you said, recently in the news. It seems like the number of kind of cyber attacks and various things going on continues to escalate or at least it seems like I hear about more and more frequently. In many cases it seems there’s kind of a state actor that’s tied to it in some way or another. As you said, it’s often very kind of — They have plausible deniability or it’s untraceable. I totally understand what you’re saying. 
 
[0:34:43.6] KK: Yeah. Generation, technological generation, in the 90s, say, or even 2000s, the U.S. and Western Europe to some extent, that was the entire world in terms of the internet. Now, every country is just jam-packed. They’ve got their smartphones, ubiquitous smartphones and stuff. This is now a global neighborhood. It’s a global platform. A lot of these things are happening in places where there’s more politics involved, there’re may be less security. I think we’re going to see a lot more of it before we — I don’t know. There’s just a lot more of it in general. 
 
It’s sort of like the body has grown and now there are sort of more ways to injure it. We will keep adding more and more layers to prevent the injury, but there will always be new ways to injure it or to exploit it. Again, I think, overall, the likelihood of the whole thing collapsing become less and less. Of course, whatever major damage has occurred becomes more and more impactful. It wouldn’t take a very big injury to really scare everybody. 
 
Again, we go back to something like terrorism. The point of terror, of course, is not really to hurt, but to inflict terror to get your demands. I think it’ll become very easy to terrorize the electronic body, the body electric even with relatively what we call minor injuries to the whole. You could really do a lot of damage just by the terror of it. That’s a second level of worry that you don’t need to do very much to actually have everybody go crazy. 
 
[0:36:41.3] MB: What would you say to somebody maybe listening to this that — I think this applies not only the kind of this specific context, but more broadly, to the whole thesis of the book that says or thinks of themselves, “Oh, yeah. All these technology changes; AI, robotics, everything else. It sounds cool but I don’t really think that’s going to happen. These Silicon Valley futurists with all these fancy ideas.” What would you say to somebody who thinks something like that? 
 
[0:37:06.1] KK: Yeah. In five years, they will certainly be able to say, “Well, none of these is happening. Look at it, VR is still not present. There’s still not AI.” 
 
One thing is — The conversation to them really having us talking about 30 years, 20 to 30 years, because I don’t think these are initially going to happen necessarily that fast. There are kind of — The general tendency is to maybe overestimate how soon they’re going to happen and underestimate the lasting impact that they have. 
 
I think, yeah, you should be maybe skeptical about the speed. In terms of the general direction, I don’t know. I don’t know what to say, because people have been saying this all along. There was a huge denial, I guess I would call it, about the early days of the internet. That this would ever become mainstream. This was the recurring criticism of our enthusiasm for the internet when it was still just typing, when it was just text. 
 
It was like, “No. This is marginal. This is appealing to teenage boys in the basement. This is not about the math. This is not a mass mainstream thing.” It was like nothing — You could say who would kind of convince anybody that otherwise. To sat that AI won’t get big, I think it won’t get maybe big fast and you could be right about it for a long time. Then there’s the other issue of the definition. Artificial intelligence is defined as that which we can’t do. 
 
People would say, “AI, we don’t have AI yet.” If you had Alexa or a Siri 50 years ago, everybody would absolutely agree that it was artificial intelligence — I woke up Alexa. Yes, even probably 30 years from now, people, they’ll say, “We still don’t have AI.” That’s because we keep redefining it as to what the thing that we can’t do yet. 
 
They would be right in that sense. In 30 years, we’ll say, “Yeah, we still don’t have AI. It’s just all a pipe dream.” Yet at the same time the cars will be driving themselves and people will say, “That’s not really AI. That’s just machine learning. That’s just brute force. That’s just computers.” 
 
There’s really no — I’m talking about the future, so there’s really no argument about it. The only thing I would say is; look, even if we don’t arrive there. Even if there isn’t ever conscious AIs walking around in humanoid bodies, even if there isn’t some AI in your ear that’s talking to you like a young girl, like in Her. Even we don’t have that, the general direction of where we’re headed is still on that direction. That’s sort of what I’m talking about in the book is like all things being equal, we’re going to move in that direction. Maybe we don’t ever arrive there, but we’re going to move in that direction. 
 
Knowing that we’re going in that direction is extremely helpful and you’ll be able to reap the benefits and minimize the harm if you understand that that’s the general direction that we’re going even if we never arrive. 
 
[0:40:43.9] MB: What would be one kind of simple piece of homework or starting point that you would give to somebody listening to this conversation as a way to maybe concretely implement some of the concepts we talked about? 
 
[0:40:55.2] KK: I think one of the most enabling forces at work is artificial intelligence and I think it’s going to impact everything we do in all the aspects of our lives, from food, fashion, sports, religion, military education, business. I would say a piece of homework is buy some AI right now. Just log on to Google, TensorFlow, or IBM, or Microsoft. Purchase some AI and start fooling around with it, just like the — 150 years ago when the Industrial Revolution is coming on — I’m doing a podcast and the guy, he’s saying, “For all those farmers out there, what would you suggest the best way for them to prepare themselves from Industrial Revolution?” I would say make a battery and start fooling around electricity. You’ll probably discover something amazing. Be able to — You’ll educate yourself. 
 
I think dabbling in these things, educating yourself so that we can talk about them intelligently so that as we come to regulate them and to tame them and domesticate them, that we do out of experience. That it’s not just something you’ve read about, that you’ve actually spent time. 
 
My entire enthusiasm and optimism comes a lot from the fact that I’ve been living online since 1981 or something and just experiencing what happens when people go digital. It’s not based so much on reading. It’s based on the fact that I have an actual experience from this. I think as much as you could do to experience these new technologies, it would really inform all the other questions you might have about where to go next. 
 
[0:42:49.1] MB: Where can listeners find you and the book online? 
 
[0:42:53.7] KK: My homepage is my initials; kk.org. A lot of my older books are actually available for free. I posted the entire text of my first book while it was still in copyright on the web for free, because at that time I owned digital rights because at the time I made the contract New York publishers didn’t think digital rights were at all valuable. They didn’t know what they were. 
 
My second book was also up in full on my website; kk.org. There are Kindle — Of course, now Kindle and paperback editions of The Inevitable. Weirdly, the paperback edition is cheaper than the Kindle edition. Don’t ask. I have no idea why. I sometimes tweet as kevin2kelly. In fact I tweeted almost — I tweeted, I would call, the entire book of The Inevitable at one point. In a sense, I tweeted a sense from every page of the page. I didn’t ask permission, I just did it. 
 
My recent little thing is from Cool Tools’. We send out a one page email newsletter thing. A one pager that’s six very brief recommendations of Cool Stuff, tips, places to go, eat, tools, whatever. Very one sentence — A couple of sentence recommendations for six things every Sunday. It’s called Recomendo with one M, recomendo.com. You can sign up there.  
 
[0:44:32.8] MB: Kevin, thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing all your incredible insights. It’s been an honor to have you on here. 
 
[0:44:39.8] KK: It’s been a real delight. Thank you for your great questions. You’re obviously a human, and so I appreciate the support and enthusiasm for my work. 
 
[0:44:48.2] MB: Thank you so much for listening to The Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. 
 
I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story, or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@successpodcast.com. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every listener email.
 
The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend, either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes, because that helps more and more people discover The Science of Success. 
 
I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all these incredible information?” Because of that, we’ve created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners, and you can get it by texting the word “smarter” to the number 442222 or by going to successpodcast.com and joining our email list. 
 
If you want to get all these incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we just talked about and much more, be sure to check our show notes. Just go to successpodcast.com and hit the show notes button at the top. 
 
Thanks again, and we’ll see you on the next episode of The Science of Success.

July 06, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
BarrySchwartz-01.png

The 3 Keys You Need To Answer Life’s Most Important Questions with Dr. Barry Schwartz

June 08, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we look at how Toyota turned the worst automobile factory in America into the best without changing any personnel, we discuss the paradox of choice, paralysis by analysis and the danger of having too many choices, the vital importance of having a multi-disciplinary viewpoint to truly understand reality, ask if there are quick fixes for wisdom, and much more with Dr. Barry Schwartz

Dr. Barry Schwartz is a Professor at the Haas school of Business at UC Berkley. He has authored over 10 books including The Paradox of Choice, Why We Work, and Practical Wisdom as well as more than 100 professional journal articles. He has been featured on the TED stage, in the The New York Times, USA Today, CNN, and much more.

We discuss:

  • How Barry’s work in animal learning, following in the footsteps of BF Skinner, led him down the path of his journey

  • Why a focus on rewards and punishments is too narrow an understanding

  • The importance of multi-disciplinary work to unearth the truth and understand reality

  • How we can begin to think in a more multi-disciplinary way

  • The answers to the most important questions in life are very complex, and efforts to simplify them are doomed to failure

  • The flaws in the dominant ideologies of western society in understanding and explaining why we work

  • People don’t work only for pay - here are the other reasons people work:

  • They want to be engaged

    1. They want discretion and control

    2. They want to be appreciated

    3. They want to be challenged

    4. They want to do something that has meaning

  • Why only 10% of the world’s workforce is “engaged in their work”

  • How did Toyota turn around the worst automobile factory in America into the BEST factory in America without changing the workforce?

  • The importance of the big 3 factors - Autonomy, Control, and Discretion

  • What has enabled the container store to be so successful

  • How focusing on improving the quality of work and creating good work can be good for the bottom line as well

  • How Aristotle defines “Wisdom”

  • How excessive management and supervision has destroyed the ability of teachers to become effective

  • How the reliance on rules and incentives to get people to behave properly is the enemy of wisdom

  • Wisdom is learned, but it can’t be taught - the way you learn to be wise is by trying and failing

  • You learned by doing, by getting it wrong, and by correcting your mistakes

  • Trial and error, mentoring, modeling - there’s no quick fix for wisdom, you have to be in it for the long haul

  • It's OK to get it wrong

  • We go deep into Barry’s famous book The Paradox of Choice

  • Paralysis by analysis and the danger of having too many choices

  • How can we simplify our lives and avoid the paradox of choice?

  • “Good enough is virtually always good enough”

  • People who aspire to “the best” get better results, and feel worse about them, than people who are happy with “good enough”

  • Don’t be unambitious and have no standards, have high standards, but don’t feel like if you aren’t the absolute best you’re a failure

  • And much more!

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] Why We Work (TED Books) by Barry Schwartz

  • [Book] The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less by Barry Schwartz

  • [Book] Practical Wisdom: The Right Way to Do the Right Thing by Barry Schwartz and Kenneth Sharpe

  • [Article] Crafting a Job: Revisioning Employees as Active Crafters of Their Work - Academy of Management

  • [Article] DYING WORDS: How should doctors deliver bad news? By Jerome Groopman

  • [Image] Artist Leo Cullum “Student Wears School Sweater That Reads Brown But My First Choice Was Yale”

  • [TED Profile] Barry Schwartz

  • [Swarthmore Profile] Barry Schwartz

  • [TEDTalk] The paradox of choice by Barry Schwartz

  • [TEDTalk] Our loss of wisdom by Barry Schwartz

  • [TEDTalk] Using our practical wisdom by Barry Schwartz

  • [TEDTalk] The way we think about work is broken by Barry Schwartz

Episode Transcript

 [00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.
 
[00:00:12.4] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind in what makes peak performance tick with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.
 
In this episode, we look at how Toyota turned the worst automobile factory in America into the best without changing any personnel. We discuss the paradox of choice, paralysis by analysis and the danger of having too many choices. We look at the vital importance of having a multi-disciplinary viewpoint to truly understand reality. We ask if there are any quick fixes for wisdom and much more with Dr. Barry Schwartz 
 
The science of success continues to grow with more with more than 1,000,000 downloads. Listeners in over 100 countries, hitting number one new noteworthy and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time asking me, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all this incredible information?” A lot of our listeners are curious about how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge you get from reading hundreds of books, conducting amazing interviews, listening to podcast and more.
 
Because of that, we created an epic resource just for you. A detailed guide called How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely free by texting the word “smarter “to the number 44222. Again, It’s a guide we created called How to Organize and Remember Everything. All you have to do to get it is to text the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or go to scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email.
 
In our previous episode, we went deep on negotiation, why no matter what you do, it’s essential to master the skill of negotiation. We looked at the barriers that prevent people like you from negotiating effectively. Why the common sense rules of the real world are a fragile collection of socially reinforced illusion. We examined the most powerful type of questions that you can use in negotiation, talked about the single biggest mistake you can make at negotiation and much more with master negotiator Kwame Christian.
 
If you want to learn the proven tactics for influencing someone and getting what you want, be sure to listen to that episode. Lastly, if you want to get all this incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we talk about on this episode and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to scienceofsuccess.co and hit the show notes button at the top.
 
[0:02:47.9] MB: Today, we have another amazing guest on the show, Barry Schwartz. Barry is a professor at the Haas school of business at UC Berkeley. He’s authored over 10 books including the paradox of choice, why we work and practical wisdom as well as more than a hundred professional journal articles. He’s been featured on the TED stage three times in the New York Times, USA today, CNN and many more media outlets.
 
Barry, welcome to the science of success.
 
[0:03:12.6] BS: Thanks, it’s great to be with you, I appreciate the invitation.
 
[0:03:15.6] MB: Well we’re very excited to have you on here today. For listeners who may not be familiar with you and your background, tell us your story?
 
[0:03:23.5] BS: Well, my story is that I only applied for one job in my whole life, I applied for a job as Swarthmore College as I was finishing up my PHD at the University of Pennsylvania. I got the job and I spent 45 years there. Just retired this past June and moved to the west coast to be closer to kids and grandkids. It’s really a remarkably boring life story. At the time I took the job at Swarthmore, I didn’t know what a good job was, I discovered that I had fallen in to what was for me the perfect job and I took full advantage of it, as I say, 45 years.
 
[0:04:05.4] MB: At Swarthmore, your research took a really interesting arc. I mean I’m sure many people are familiar with the book that you’ve written. How did your quest to kind of understand humans and the way that we behave lead you down that path?
 
[0:04:20.7] BS: Well, that’s actually one of the great blessings at Swarthmore. My training was in the field of psychology called Animal Learning and mostly derived from the work of BF Skinner who was a very prominent psychologist for half a century but your listeners may not even know who he is anymore.
 
But he had this view that basically, the way to understand all kinds of creatures including human beings is by looking at the rewards and punishments that our various actions produce. That we were creatures who pursue rewards and avoid punishments and if you understood that, you understood everything.
 
That always struck me as wrong, as inaccurate, it didn’t seem to fit my own behavior, it didn’t seem to fit the behavior of the people I knew and worked with. I sort of devoted myself to criticizing this approach but I had a very narrow view of what that meant and the great thing about Swarthmore College is that it’s easy to interact with people in other disciplines.
 
I spent a lot of time with philosophers, with political scientists, with economists and gradually my concerns about Skinner psychology expanded to include this sort of ideology, that economics has purveyed for the last several hundred years. The books I wrote, even the ones before the ones that you mentioned were really focused not just on criticizing a particular view that came out of psychology but also criticizing the dominant ideology of western societies which comes out of economics would never have happened if I had not been at a place like Swarthmore which makes talking across discipline so easy. That’s my history. 
 
[0:06:11.4] MB: Sorry, what were you going to say?
 
[0:06:13.6] BS: Well, I mean, you know. Students occasionally ask me, well how can you do that? I want to have your career and I tell them, well you can’t. I was just lucky and the world doesn’t support this kind of multidisciplinary activity in the way that it did when I started out a long time ago.
 
[0:06:34.9] MB: You know, I think multi-disciplinary knowledge and thinking about things form different kind of pools of wisdom, such an important way to understand the world and longtime listeners will know that on the show, we’re huge fans of Warren Buffet’s business partner, Charlie Monger who talks at length about how the only real way to understand reality is to come at it from a multidisciplinary approach.
 
[0:07:00.0] BS: I think that’s right, the trouble is that fields in the sciences have become more and more technical and more and more specialized so there’s a sense that you can’t be good at one thing while you’re trying to learn anything. That’s produced a kind of silo in and tunnel vision on the part of most social scientists and natural scientist too. The inter disciplinary side of things has to be provided by someone else because people working in the lab don’t have time to learn what economist say and what sociologist say and so on.
 
It falls to people who are writing about what scientist do to try to make those connections across disciplines and then you hope that they actually know enough of the science if they get the science right which is why I tell young people that they simply can’t do what I did. The world won’t allow them to.
 
I agree with Charlie Monger about the importance of inter disciplinary. It may well be that the way you achieve it is by having multiple people who talk to one another, each of them a specialist but their viewpoints converge on a common problem and out of that emerges a more nuanced and complete picture that any one of them could give.
 
[0:08:23.4] MB: You know, in many ways, what we try to do here on the science of success is pull from experts like you, people in various different fields and try to deliver in some small way, a glimpse at this rich, multi-disciplinary texture of reality.
 
[0:08:39.9] BS: No, I very much appreciate it, it’s just you know, a lot of people don’t like to hear as an answer to their question, it’s complicated. They want a simple straight forward answer that points them down the path they have to travel in order to be successful or to be happy or to be whatever it is they think they want.
 
The truth is that the answers to the questions like this about how to live your life productively and fruitfully are complicated. They’re not simple. If you’re expecting simple answers, you’re either going to be misled or you’re going to be disappointed.
 
[0:09:19.8] MB: Such an important point and I couldn’t agree more. I think whenever we try to make something too simple and kind of force people down a path of “these are the 10 things you need to do to be happy” or whatever it might be, we miss a lot of the subtlety and the nuance and the understanding that kind of digging in and getting a deeper and richer perspective can really give you.
 
[0:09:44.9] BS: I think that’s right. I think you should be — your listeners should be very weary of books that have lists.
 
[0:09:52.3] MB: I’d love to dig in to something you touched on a moment ago, we could talk about this all day but I want to talk about some of the really important concepts that you’ve written about. You mentioned some of the dominant ideologies of western society, specifically economics and BF Skinner, the research he did on with pigeons and the work on the focus on rewards and punishments. Tell me about the way that we view the world today.
 
What are some of the flaws of that ideology? Specifically I know you’ve discussed and written at length about that within the world of and kind of the field of work.
 
[0:10:25.1] BS: Yes, you know, the little book I wrote, Why We Work, sort of begins with the views of Adam Smith who is the father of economics and he wrote his book, The Wealth of Nations, 250 years ago and his view was that people are lazy, they don’t want to work, they’d rather just sit on the couch munching chips and watching football games or whatever the 18th century equivalent of that was.
 
People are lazy, you got to get them off their behinds to do anything. The way you get them off their behinds is by paying them, by giving them rewards. If you give them rewards, it really doesn’t much matter what they do.
 
Since the only reason they’re doing anything is to get paid, they will do anything that gets them paid. This was an argument for creating workplaces where the work people did was repetitive, mechanical, mindless and relatively unskilled and their virtue of that was it seemed to cater to create efficiency.
 
I could train you up in 10 minutes to do your job. If the job I was giving you didn’t require much skill. If it required a lot of skill and discretion and judgment on your part then it might take months for you to become a satisfactory employee.
 
There was no point in creating jobs like that since you were basically only doing it to get paid anyway. That was his ideology and it gave rise to the industrial revolution and it was manifested at various points along the way, there was this discipline called Quote Scientific Management at the turn of the 20th century where people would go through factories with stopwatches and do time and motion studies to try to shape each task on the factory floor into the most efficient economical mindless task you could possibly do.
 
Again, the same ideology. People work for pay so it doesn’t matter what they do, why not make what they do as easy as possible. Very much like pigeons pecking for food or rats pressing levers for food. You have people pressing pans in a factory for food or for money.
 
That’s the ideology that has governed the shaping of the workplace in western society and it’s wrong. Yes, people worked for pay but they don’t work only for pay, people care about other things. 
 
They want to be engaged in what they do, they want to have some digression and control over what they do, they want to learn, they want to be challenged, they want to be appreciated by and respected by their colleagues and supervisors and most important, they want to do something that has meaning.
 
Meaning is a complicated term but largely what it means to say that work has meaning is that at the end of the work day, you’ve done something to make somebody else’s life better even in some small way. All of those things matter to people, they matter more than the paycheck although without the paycheck, people wouldn’t be working. 
 
We have systematically deprived people of opportunities to be engaged, challenged and have some control in their work lives. Gallop which polls people every year about their attitude toward work, finds that roughly 10% of the workforce internationally, describes itself as engaged by their work.
 
One in 10 people are eager to get out of bed every morning and go to work. That’s just a crime and I think it stems from this ideology that started with Adam Smith 250 years ago that has basically turned people into automata because they don’t have the opportunity to find jobs that they feel make a difference in their lives and in the lives of other people.
 
That’s what the book was about and there’s ample evidence that people really do care, not just about how they get paid but about what they do to get paid. When they think what they do is meaningful, they do better work. Not only is it better for them, it’s better for their customers and clients and it’s better for their companies because the companies end up being more profitable.
 
If you’re eager to go to work every day, your company is more successful than if you go to work reluctantly every day, it’s like, how could that not be true? And it is true. That’s what the book’s about.
 
[0:15:02.8] MB: Tell me about some of the ways that this kind of perspective on human nature has deprived people of these opportunities?
 
[0:15:11.3]BS: So, you know, the typical ascent, I’ll give you a striking example from about 30 years ago. There was a General Motors factory in Numi in Northern California that was by everyone’s account, the single worst factory in the automobile plant in the United States. The most defects, the slowest production, the most antagonism between labor and management, it was just an unmitigated disaster.
 
Toyota took over the plant, they wanted sort of a beachhead in the United States and they entered into a partnership with General Motors and took over the plant and over a period of about a year, they introduced the Toyota style of production.
 
That had many different characteristics but one of the central characteristics is that people on the shop floor were given the authority to stop production if they saw something wrong. That is to say, Toyota really cared about quality and they made everyone on the floor an agent to assure that there would be quality.
 
Which was very different from the way that GM plant had offered. In the space of two years, the plant went from being the worst automobile plant in the United states to being the best and what’s striking about this example is that the workforce didn’t change, it was the same people.
 
We used to think a lot of people thought the reason Japanese manufacturing is better than American is that you know, Japanese have all the self-discipline and self-control and they’re willing to do what they’re told and you can’t discipline the American workforce the way you can discipline the Japanese workforce.
 
This was done, this transformation was done with the same drug taking, alcohol drinking assembly line sabotaging American workers that had made the worst automobile plant in the country for General Motors just a few short years before. One saline characteristic of the Toyota plant is that there were these ropes hanging from the ceiling and anyone on the assembly line can pull on the rope if they see something wrong and it stops the assembly line.
 
You don’t need to go to a manager, you have autonomy and control and discretion and you are a partner in the pursuit of quality. An equal partner, you pull on the rope, the line stops and people try to figure out what’s gone wrong.
 
That strikes me as an example of how you can take work that people regard as meaningless and are doing only to get a paycheck and turn it into work that people regard as meaningful. You know, it doesn’t hurt to remind people on the assembly line that what they do has consequences for the health and safety of their fellow citizen’s right?
 
If you drive a defective car, you may get into an accident and you may get killed and your 18 month old baby may get killed. Every car you make, you have people’s lives in your hands. How much time do you think is devoted to reminding people on the assembly line that they’re responsible for the health and safety of their fellow citizens? I suspect not very much.
 
If you made that salient, the attitude people brought to the job would be quite different than the attitude they have when they think they’re just putting in rivets to get a paycheck. That’s just one dramatic example, it’s not hard to find others, I write in some detail about hospital janitors, this is work that my friend and colleague Amy Wrzesniewski has done.
 
You know, hospital janitors are at the very bottom of the hierarchy in hospitals. They’re essentially invisible and most of them are just punching a clock and doing the long list of tasks that they have to do, washing floors, emptying trash, making beds, stuff like that.
 
But there are some hospital janitors who think their job is to do whatever is necessary to enable to help the hospital to serve its mission of curing disease and easing suffering. They look for opportunities to do things that are not part of the job description, to make the patients feel a little less anxious and depressed, to make the patient’s families feel a little bit more comfortable.
 
They are always to help a nurse who has to turn a big patient so the patient doesn’t get bed sores. They’re always looking out and asking, what can I do to make the hospital run better? It’s not part of their job description, they don’t get paid for it but when you interview them, they tell you that this is why they love the job.
 
It’s not because they wash floors, it’s because they contribute to the curing of disease and the elimination of suffering. You can find this in any occupation as long as people are given enough space that they can create the kind of job that they think is worth doing.
 
We’ve made it  harder and harder for people to find that kind of space by over supervising and over incentivizing the work that most of us do.
 
[0:20:26.3] MB: I think that’s a great point that it’s not part of the job description, it’s not what they’re being paid to do and the focus on just monitor rewards and punishments and incentives obscures something deeper.
 
[0:20:42.6]BS: Absolutely. I’ll give you another example but there is this chain that you see in malls all over the country called the Container Store, are you familiar with the Container Store?
 
[0:20:53.5] MB: Yeah, the Container Store is great.
 
[0:20:55.3]BS: Yeah, it sells pieces of plastic that we put stuff in that we probably shouldn’t have bought in the first place right? That’s what it does, if you walk into that store and I have now been in many of them and it seems to me that the attitude is the same in every one of them, the enthusiasm and knowledge and commitment that the people working in those stores bring to their jobs is unbelievable.
 
You know, most people working in malls think their job is to sell stuff. But people at the Container Store think their job is to solve your problem. You come in with a problem and they, knowing all of the inventory and stuff, they have the expertise to help you solve the problem.

That’s their job, if it means a sale, well that’s great, if it doesn’t, also great. By solving people’s problems, they will generate and maintain a loyal customer base. The enthusiasm with which the people in those stores do their work is simply extraordinary and it’s because effort has been made to make the work, to remind people that the work they do actually has meaning. The work they do actually makes the lives of other people better.
 
That’s baked into I think the ethic of the whole enterprise. Any retail sales person, any retail sales person could have that attitude, somebody comes into the shoe store, my job is to solve this person’s problem.
 
Not, my job is to sell expensive shoes, my job is to solve this person’s problem. That changes everything. It’s not hard to do but if you’re committed to this ideology that people just work for a paycheck, it wouldn’t occur to you to make a point of the mission of meeting names and solving problems.
 
[0:22:51.8] MB: You know, as you mentioned the Container Store’s, done incredibly well and it’s the kind of place that when you hear about it, you're like, it doesn’t really make sense, how is that even a store? Then when you go in, you have one experience there and you become a huge fan of what they’re doing.
 
Which underscores another point you made that a little bit earlier that it’s not just good for the people working at these companies. It’s good for the company’s bottom line as well and it creates more engagement, it creates a better experience for the customers and you’ve also written at length or talked about the example of a carpet company. Can you share that story?
 
[0:23:27.2]BS: Yeah. It’s also a wonderful story. Rey Anderson ran this company called Interface that made carpet tile that you mostly saw in institutional settings like say, airport terminals. Extremely successful company, he has more money than he knew what to do with and he had this epiphany as a 70 year old that he was going to leave his grandchildren piles of money and a planet that was quickly becoming uninhabitable. 
 
This bothered him because it turned out that the carbon footprint of the production process that they used at Interfaced carpet was extremely high right? They were destroying the earth while making a pile of money.
 
He single-mindedly committed the company to becoming a zero footprint company in the space of 15 years or so. He assumed that it would cost the company money but he didn’t care. He wasn’t in it for the money anymore, he was in it to save the planet.
 
They slowly introduced a whole — they completely revamped their production process to move to a zero footprint at this point, they’re about 75% of the way there, he unfortunately passed away. They’re making huge progress but the amazing thing is that instead of losing money, the company has become more profitable than it was before.
 
And his explanation for that is that the workforce was so energized because they were no longer simply making carpet, they were making carpet and saving the planet that they came to work alert, energized, full of suggestions about how they could make the production process both more efficient and less energy demanding. They were on a mission.
 
Being on a mission made the production process much more effective. Much to his surprise, this enhanced profitability, rather than diminishing it, it’s not why he did it, that was a benefit but this raises a huge mystery. If it’s true in general which I think it is, that enlightened management and work organization and that is enlightened in the sense that the people working there want to be there, enhances profitability, the question that you should be asking is why hasn’t every work place transformed itself? 
 
Even if you don’t care about your employees, you surely care about the bottom line. If the way to have a better bottom line is to give employees work to do that they’re eager to do, why not do that? And yet most workplaces don’t do that and I try to explain, it’s a real puzzle right? Your job as a company leader is to maximize profit. How do you maximize profit, give people work to do that they want to do, why hasn’t every workplace done that?
 
My explanation for that is that we’re so in the grip of this ideology that started with Adam Smith that it doesn’t even occur to people that they should care about creating a workplace where the employees care about what they do. They have blinders on collectively which is making workers miserable and making the goods and services less satisfactory.
 
[0:26:54.0] MB: So for somebody who is listening that maybe is in a management position or kind of doesn’t have the ability to implement some of these changes from a high level, how can they harness some of these lessons?
 
[0:27:07.0]BS: Well the answer to that question is really, that it depends, if you’re in a workplace where you are not excessively stringently supervised, you can ask yourself, how can I recraft my work so that while this front and center is the way in which what I do, serves to my customers and clients, right? 
 
Anybody who works retail can walk into the store ever day with a different attitude. “I’m here to solve a problem,” not, “I’m here to sell you shoes.” If you’re excess — and that will change everything because now you develop a relationship with your customer, you’re really interested in what the problem is that the customer’s trying to solve, you apply your expertise to assist in finding out a solution and you feel satisfied even if the customer walks out without a pair of shoes.
 
As long as the customer feels like the problem has been solved. If however you got somebody looking over your shoulder, if you have to make a number every quarter or else you lose your job, then you don’t have the luxury to recraft your work in this way and so excessively controlling managers may make it so that the people who are listening to you, who are not in management positions really can’t do anything.
 
You need a certain amount of freedom, those hospital janitors who worry about the care and comfort of the patients are not just the cleanliness of the rooms, we’re able to do that because they didn’t have a supervisor walking around behind them, shaking a finger anytime they did something that wasn’t part of their job description. You could easily imagine a hospital cutting its staff so that now the janitors had to clean twice as many rooms as they had before and they no longer have time to do the work the way they think it should be done.
 
Now all they’re doing is emptying trash and washing floors and there’s somebody watching them to make sure that that’s what they’re doing. You need a certain amount of benign neglect by the people who supervise you in order to have the freedom to reinterpret your work in a way that makes it more meaningful. A lot of us are in that position but not all of us are in that position.
 
[0:29:24.9] MB: In many ways, some of this lessons underscore a lot of the concepts you talked about in your previous book about wisdom. I’d love to Segway into that topic. Tell me how do you define the concept of wisdom?
 
[0:29:39.2]BS: Well, you know, I’m not a big fan of definitions, especially definitions of highly difficult ideas like wisdom but what my co-author Ken Sharp and I did was basically, we took Aristotle, the philosopher Aristotle’s definition and describe wisdom as knowing, doing the right thing at the right time in the right way for the right reason.
 
Now that’s quite vague, what’s the right thing, what’s the right way, it was deliberately vague because what we try to suggest is that when you are a doctor treating patients, you have to start out asking, what’s the appropriate goal of this activity? What am I here for? What would it mean to be a good doctor?
 
And having answered that question for yourself, you then said about behaving in ways that pursue that appropriate goal and it could mean different things with different patients. Wisdom requires judgment with some patients, you have to tell them what to do because if you’re not forceful and directive, they won’t follow your advice, other patients you may have to lead them so that they discover what to do, how to change their diet, how to get more exercise and what have you.
 
There is no formulaic approach to treating patients because so much of it depends on the patient who is sitting across the examining tables from you. This I think is obvious when it comes to parenting, nobody who actually had experience being a parent believes that there is a formula for good parenting.

Every child presents parents with unique challenges. Reckless kids, you need to be protective. Timid kids, you need to sort of push them a little bit. Once ripe for the kid depends on the kid. Wise parents know this, are perceptive about what their kids are like and what their kids need but their aim always is to give each child what he or she needs at the moment when that need is presented.
 
Same thing is true with teachers. Every kid in the second grade class needs to be approached somewhat differently. The effort to supervise and monitor and assess teachers has essentially led to a kind of sort of teaching by script you know? Somebody sitting in some room in the central board of education will come up with a script for teaching I don’t know what, math second graders and then you just follow the script.
 
Well, any good teacher knows that that’s a terrible way to teach. That the script is not right for any student, certainly not right for every student and instead, you have to find ways to deviate from the script in ways that will help Johnny over here and Jane over there. A good teacher needs to be a wise teacher, a good parent needs to be a wise parent, a good spouse needs to be a wise spouse, a good doctor needs to be a wise doctor.
 
Using judgment and discretion in the service of goals that are appropriate to the activity, that’s I guess as close as I can come to defining what I mean by wisdom. The reliance on rules and incentives to get people to behave properly is the enemy of cultivating wisdom, the more you have to follow rules, the less opportunity you have to develop your judgement and the more you control by incentives, the less you’re controlled by the appropriate objectives of the activity.
 
Stimulating the minds of kids if you're a teacher, curing disease if you're a doctor, what have you. That’s what wisdom is about, we think the appeal to rules and incentives is a substitute for what we really need which is a bunch of people in various positions who want to do the right thing and have the judgment to figure out what the right thing is in a given situation.
 
[0:33:56.4] MB: How do we cultivate the machinery of wisdom and the idea, the ability to make those decisions and understand when to step away from the rules or when to improvise?
 
[0:34:10.0]BS: You have to — one of the things that Ken and I say is that wisdom is learned but it can’t be taught and what we mean by that is you can’t give a course on wisdom that teaches people to be watched. You can give a course on wisdom which we did that teaches people why wisdom is important but the way you learn to be wise is by trying and failing, you know?
 
A wise doctor doesn’t start out as a wise doctor. Tries things, gets feedback, is sensitive to feedback, adjusts his or her approach to the situation at hand on the basis of that feedback and over time, starts to make these judgments right most of the time.
 
There’s a wonderful article that appeared in The New Yorker by an oncologist named  Jerome Groopman who writes frequently for The New Yorker Magazine. It’s called Dying Words and in it he describes how he learned how to give patients bad news. As an oncologist, he has to give patients bad news often unfortunately. So he describes telling a 20 something year old woman that she has metastatic breast cancer and is probably going to be dead in two years and the subtlety and nuance with which he has the conversation, making sure that she’s not completely crushed by the news but also making sure that she isn’t unrealistically optimistic about what her future is and the more optimistic she looks, the more he gives her pieces of the dark side of the story. 
The more depressed she looks, the more he gives her pieces to be hopeful about. He’s calibrating everything he says and the way he says it based on the kinds of questions she asks and her facial expressions. It’s a beautiful account of a wise interaction over an extremely difficult topic. 
 
But then he says, “You know I’m pretty good at this. How did I learn?” and he describes how bad he was at in the beginning of his career. He started out thinking you just have to be honest with patients and he wrecked somebody’s life by just being brutally honest. “You’re going to be dead in two years” well she ended up six years and she spent every day basically in fear that this was the day that the hammer would fall and her life would be over. 
 
So the next patient, he hid the seriousness of the disease and the result was he was this guy who died incredibly uncomfortable tied to a million tubes and wires and slowly overtime, he found the sweet spot, this place in between brutal honestly and completely dishonesty where he mostly found the right approach with every patient although of course, like anyone else, he sometimes gets it wrong. So you learn by doing, by getting it wrong and by correcting your mistakes. 
 
It helps a lot to have a mentor, somebody who’s already been through the process. Who you can watch so that you can do some of your learning without having the patient suffer from your mistakes and that’s another point that Groopman makes in this article is that when doctors have these conversations with their patients, the door to their office is closed so that young doctors who are learning don’t get to see it in operation. 
 
The first time he ever had to do this with a patient was also the first time he had seen anyone do it and that’s why he was so bad at it. So trial and error, mentoring, modeling are the way we gradually move to being wiser at our tasks which is another way of saying there’s no quick fix. You have to be in for the long haul and be prepared occasionally to get it wrong and if you are a supervisor you have to be prepared for the people you supervise sometimes to get it wrong. 
 
The hope is that overtime they get it wrong less and less, they get it right more and more and the result is that clients and customers or students or patients benefit. That’s what that book is about. 
 
[0:38:25.9] MB: It’s such an important point that it is okay to be wrong and that it’s actually a necessary part of the path to wisdom. I think so often in our society, at school, in the workplace and many instances, the incentive seemed to be lying around trying to never be wrong or trying to hide whenever you’re wrong when in reality, you should actually in many ways set out and try to make mistakes so that you can learn from them and become better. 
 
[0:38:53.2] BS: That’s right. Now obviously there are certain circumstances where mistakes can’t be tolerated although they are inevitable, right? If you’re doing open heart surgery, you really don’t want to encourage surgeons in training to be making mistakes but most of the situations that we face in life aren’t like open heart surgery. You can make a mistake and you can correct it but I think you’re right that the culture is a culture in which the idea is to reduce error to zero. 
 
And the only way to reduce error to zero is to get people scripts to follow. When you give people scripts to follow, you get mediocrity not excellence. You may prevent catastrophic errors but you also prevent extraordinary achievements and I don’t think that’s something we should be aspiring to. 
 
[0:39:43.2] MB: One of your other books that is incredibly popular is the book “The Paradox of Choice”. I think a lot of people have heard about that, maybe think that they sort of understand it but may not really grasp the fundamental lesson from that book. Can you share that concept? 
 
[0:39:59.6] BS: Sure, the lesson is pretty simple. We, in western societies, are committed to the view that the more freedom people have, the better off they are and the way to give people lots of freedom is to give them lots of choice. So the more choice people have, the better off they are and the thesis of the book is that while it is certainly true that people need choice, discretion and control over their lives and that choice is a good thing. 
 
There can be too much of a good thing and when there is too much which is sort of a way modern life has become at least for Athlon people, when there is too much choice instead of being liberated by it, people paralyze. They can’t pull the trigger. Paralysis by analysis. When they do pull the trigger, they’re more likely to make bad decisions and even if they manage to make good decisions, they’re less satisfied with them because it’s so easy to imagine that one of the alternatives would have been better. 
 
So the paradox of choice, the subtitle is “why more is less”, there is some amount of freedom and choice that is terrific for us but when you exceed that amount, these negatives, the paralysis and the dissatisfaction start to overwhelm the positives and we end up even when we choose well, dissatisfied with what we’ve chosen and I think when the book came out, there’s a new edition of it that just came out but originally it was published 10 years ago. 
 
When the book came out people were going through life in affluent industrial size, vaguely dissatisfied and with this vague sense that something was wrong and they couldn’t put their finger on it and the book hit a nerve. As soon as I said “there could be too much choice” it was like, “Ah! That’s what’s driving me crazy! That’s why I can’t go shopping anymore. That’s why I can’t pick out a cellphone” blah-blah-blah. That’s why it had the impact that it did. 
 
Although I must say, it’s not like I’ve seen companies thereby reduce the number of options they give people and the book, two of trivial things, like choosing cereal in a supermarket but I also see it with undergraduates. Very talented undergraduates who are interested in a lot of different things and go to a lot of different things and graduation is the point where they have to decide what they are going to be as a grown up and they can’t pull the trigger. 
 
They know that if they walk through one door, the medical school door say lots of other doors are going to be slammed shut and they want to be damn sure that the door they’re walking through is the right one and the result is a kind of paralysis that can leave them basically running in place for months or years hoping one morning they’re going to wake up knowing what they should do with the rest of their lives. It’s very anxiety producing. 
 
I think many college students are close to basket cases because they can’t figure out what they’re supposed to do as grownups and we don’t help them. 
 
[0:43:01.6] MB: I think that’s a struggle that millennials probably face even when they get out of undergrad and get into the workplace thinking about “Is this the career path I want to go down, is this the opportunity that I want to be pursuing,” how can we help strike that balance or how can we help move beyond the paradox of choice and try to simplify our own lives? 
 
[0:43:23.4] BS: Well it’s not easy when you try it and the world won’t just let you by rubbing a new shinny object in your nose and all seems “why don’t I have that? Should I have that? Should I have that version of it?” I think the single most important attitude that people can have when it comes to facing all of these choice is that good enough is virtually always good enough. You don’t need the best cereal or the best cellphone or the best cellphone plan or even the best job. 
 
You need a good enough form and what this does is it simplifies the choice problem because you don’t need to look at every job and you don’t need to look at every cellphone. You just need to look at them until you find one that meets your standards and then you choose it and you don’t worry about alternatives that you have and investigate. This also seems so un-American. I mean who would settle for good enough when somewhere out there is the best? 
 
I think and we have some empirical evidence that people who aspire to the best get better results and feel worse about them than people who are just looking for good enough. So going through life asking “What is a good enough restaurant, what’s a good enough vacation? What’s a good enough apartment? What’s a good enough job?” is the single best remedy to this explosion of choice that we all face but it’s not like you snap your fingers and you suddenly become content with good enough. 
 
It takes practice. It’s going to make you uncomfortable for a while. Eventually you’ll get used to it and you discover that a good enough phone is pretty much as good as the best phone and you stop worrying that maybe you’ve left a better option on the table somewhere. So that’s the guidance that I would give people. My experience is that it is very hard to convince young people to adopt this attitude. That experience teaches you that good enough is almost always good enough. 
 
But when you are in your 20’s it seems unambitious almost contemptible to go through life just looking for good enough options so you have to learn the hard way. 
 
[0:45:37.9] MB: And what would you say to somebody’s who’s a younger listener that feels like this is the equivalent of saying “you just settle and not try to strive to be the best and achieve the most”? 
 
[0:45:53.7] BS: Well here’s the thing: I am saying that you should settle but settle doesn’t mean have no standards. You don’t need to strive to be the best, you need to strive to be excellent. You don’t have to strive to have the most, you need to strive to have enough. So I’m not saying that “don’t be an ambitious, have no standards, eat whatever somebody puts in front of you, take the first job that comes your way,” I am not saying that at all. 
 
Have standards, have high standards but don’t feel like if you haven’t gotten the best and if you haven’t scored the best you are a failure. You don’t need to get into the best college as if we know what that even is. You just need to get into a good college. There are lots and lots of good colleges. There is only one best college and nobody knows what that one is because there is no metric. We are only processing it but if you’re convinced that there is a best college and you don’t get into it you feel miserable. 
 
There is a cartoon I show when I talk about this of a young woman wearing a sweatshirt that says “Brown but my first choice was Yale.” You don’t want to go to Brown and spend four years there thinking you have been better of only if you have gotten into Yale and a lot of people go through their lives in exactly this way and it makes them take less than full advantage of wonderful opportunities because they think right around the corner were better opportunities that somehow were not made available to them. 
 
So yeah, this is not an argument for those standards, it’s an argument that settle is not a bad thing although usually when people say you’re just settling, it implies that you’re not ambitious enough, you don’t have high enough standards. I don’t think that’s necessarily true.
 
[0:47:50.8] MB: I think it’s a great point and the idea that you don’t have to necessarily strive to be the very best as long as you have standards of excellence and high enough standards, you’re still ultimately going to end up in a pretty good place or be okay and as you said, good enough is virtually always good enough. 
 
[0:48:09.1] BS: Well that’s the mantra. You need to go through life which brings to yourself good enough is almost always good enough. Good enough is almost always good enough and then you won’t feel that you have to examine every pair of jeans in the city before you decide which pair of jeans to buy. 
 
[0:48:28.1] MB: So for listeners who want to implement concretely some of the ideas that we’ve talked about today, what is one piece of homework that you would give them to start with these concepts? 
 
[0:48:39.2] BS: Well, the book “The Paradox of Choice” has in its last chapter a set of 10 or 11 suggestions about what people can do to make the choice problem less of a problem and rather than rehearse them, I would encourage people to have a look at the book. It’s not hard to read. The question about, with making work worthwhile and about wisdom is to look at A, when you are choosing a job focus on its meaningfulness more and its material benefits less. 
 
Focus a lot on the nature of organizational structure and management of the enterprise. Are you going to have freedom and flexibility? Are you going to be permitted to fail? Is this work organized around some objective that does more than simply line the pockets of the company? Does it make a difference to somebody in the world? If you choose work that pays less well but makes a difference, you’ll get much more satisfaction out of it than if you choose work that seems to be completely pointless but is very generous in compensation. 
 
So you want to choose the work based on the things that actually matter to people more than salary and then you want to look for opportunities within the job for you to use your discretion and autonomy and make judgments about how best to do the task where you don’t feel completely constrained by the management structure to follow a narrow company work. So you can do a lot of crafting of your work as we said before as long as you’re not over supervised. 
 
So I think of these as features of work what’s it’s point, how much control and discretion am I going to have, will lead to better job choices then what’s the salary benefit and vacation schedule and I think most of the people listening to this probably already know this but it can’t hurt to emphasize that you need to have the right criteria in choosing what kind of work to do and where.
 
[0:50:58.2] MB: And where can listeners find you and your books online? 
 
[0:51:03.6] BS: Well Amazon has them all and I don’t really have much of an online presence. In an effort as you have asked before, to simplify my life, I don’t blog. You can find talks that I have given in various places online all over the place including those three Ted Talks that you mentioned and that’s of course the most painless way to get a sense of the ideas and The Choice Book and The Wisdom Book and The Work Book. 
 
There are these three 15 minute talks that basically tell you my whole story. Lots of people have watched them and apparently appreciated them. So I would say start with Ted if you want something online and the books are all available in Amazon. They are all still in print happily. 
 
[0:51:51.8] MB: Well, Barry thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing all these wisdom with our listeners. I know that they are really going to get a lot out of these concepts and all of the suggestions that you made.
 
[0:52:02.6] BS: Well thank you, it’s really been a pleasure. Your questions have been wonderful and I hope listeners find at least some of it useful and relevant. 
 
[0:52:11.0] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners, if you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@scienceofsuccess.co. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every listener email. 
 
The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes. That helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt how do you organize and remember all these information?” Because of that, we created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. 
 
You can get it by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or by going to scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. If you want to get all of these incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we just talked about and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to scienceofsuccess.co and hit the show notes button at the top. Thanks again and we’ll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success.
 
 

June 08, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
JulianTreasure-01.jpg

The Secret of How Sound Can Make You Be Happier & Achieve More with Julian Treasure

May 18, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we go deep on sound – we discuss how sound changes your body and affects your heart rate, breathing, brain waves, and hormone secretions, the secret to cultivating soundscapes that make us happier and more productive, the incredible power of listening and how it can change your reality, how, like sound waves, we are all vibrating, from the smallest physical level, to the macro level, and much more with Julian Treasure.

Julian Treasure is the chair of the Sound Agency, a consultancy firm that advises worldwide businesses on how to effectively use sound. Julian has delivered 5 TED talks with more than 30 million views about listening, communication, and the effect sound has on the human brain. He is the author of the book Sound Business and the upcoming book How To Be Heard. His work has been featured in Time Magazine, The Economist, and many more.

We discuss:

  • Why musicians have slightly larger brains than non-musicians

  • We are all vibrating, from the smallest physical level, to the macro level

  • What is sound itself and how does it affect us?

  • How sound changes your body and affects your heart rate, breathing, brain waves, and hormone secretions

  • What sound to listen to if you have trouble sleeping

  • How sound entrains all of your bodily rhythms

  • How music and sound impacts your mood, feelings, emotions, and psychology

  • It is possible to listen to two people talking at once?

  • How ambient noise (especially human voice) can reduce your productivity by up to 66%

  • How noise can negatively change your behavior, create stress, etc

  • How noise kills 1 million health-years per year in Europe (via reduced life expectancy)

  • The secret to cultivating soundscapes that make us happier and more productive

  • The incredible power of listening and how it can change your reality

  • The underutilized sensitivity and power in the ears

  • Why it's a grave mistake to think that everyone listens the same way that you do

  • How silence is a vital part of improving your ability to listen

  • The power of 3 minutes of silence per day

  • Why open-plan offices are terrible for concentration and contemplation

  • “The mixer” exercise you can perform to make yourself a better listener

  • The importance of savoring the mundane sounds around us every day

  • How you can use "listening positions” to transform how you listen

  • The difference between critical listening vs empathic listening

  • We all want to be heard, to be understood, and to be valued

  • Do men and women have different default listening positions?

  • Convergent listening vs divergent listening

  • How “RASA” can make you a much better listener

  • How truly listening to someone can be an amazing gift

  • The human voice is one of the most complex and amazing instruments in the world

  • The 4 communication channels - Reading, writing, speaking, listening

  • The way you say something is much more important than how you say it

  • The vocal toolbox and how you can use these tools to be a more effective communicator

  • Posture is a critical component in the vocal toolbox

  • The power of breath, and a simple breathing exercise we can all use

  • The registers we can use to change the power of our voice

  • The modal register

  • How to speak from the chest

  • You want your voice to have the timbre of hot chocolate (rich, smooth)

  • How changing pace, pitch, and tone can impact how someone receives what you say and make you a more powerful communicator

  • How silence can be an incredible tool in your vocal toolbox

  • The four cornerstones of powerful speech

  • Good speaking is not about you, it's about the other person

  • It all comes down to listening, fundamentally - understanding listening positions is the most important idea of all of those

  • Ask yourself “What’s the listening?”

  • How technology is starting to work more and more towards speaking and listening as skillsets

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] How to be Heard: Secrets for Powerful Speaking and Listening by Julian Treasure

  • [Book] Sound Business 2nd Edition by Julian Treasure

  • [Personal Site] Julian Treasure - Master of Sound

  • [TedTalk] How to speak so that people want to listen by Julian Treasure

  • [TedTalk] 5 ways to listen better by Julian Treasure

  • [Video] The sound of happiness: Julian Treasure at TEDxCannes

  • [Video] "Vocal fry" speaking with Faith Salie

  • [Website] VIV

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[00:00:12.4] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind in what makes peak performance tick with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode, we go deep on sound, we discuss how sound changes your body and affects your heart rate, breathing, brain waves and hormone secretions. The secret of cultivating soundscapes that make us happier and more productive, the incredible power of listening and how it can change your reality. How like sound waves, we are all vibrating form the smallest physical level all the way up to the macro level and much more with Julian Treasure.

The science of success continues to grow with more than 975,000 downloads. Listeners in over 100 countries, hitting number one new noteworthy and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time asking me, Matt, how do you organize and remember all this incredible information? A lot of our listeners are curious how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge you get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to podcast and more.

Because of that, we created an epic resource just for you. A detailed guide called How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely for free by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, It’s a guide we created called How to Organize and Remember Everything. All you have to do to get it is to text the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or go to scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email.

In our previous episode, we dug into a massive framework for answering some of the biggest questions in life. Ask if it’s possible to integrate 50,000 years of human knowledge into a single comprehensive map of reality. We looked at the greatest good that a human being can achieve, we went deep on the path of waking up, offered by thousands of years, hundreds of cultures and with the clearest and strikingly similar paths to enlightenment are across all of those.

We discussed how to integrate and understand connections between art, morality and science as well as much more with our guest Ken Wilbur. If you want to incorporate massive amounts of human knowledge into your understanding of reality, be sure to listen to that episode. Lastly, if you want to get all this incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we talk about on this episode and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to scienceofsuccess.co and hit the show notes button at the top.

[0:02:57.1] MB: Today, we have another great guest on the show, Julian Treasure. Julian is the chair of the sound agency, a consultancy firm that advises worldwide businesses on how they can effectively use sound. He’s delivered five TED Talks with more than 30 million views about listening, communication and the effect sound has on the human brain.

He’s the author of the book sound business as well as the upcoming book, how to be heard. His work has been featured in time magazine, the economist and many other publications. Julian, welcome to the science of success.

[0:03:26.1] JT: Thank you Mat, it’s a great pleasure to be here.

[0:03:28.3] MB: We’re very excited to have you on the show today. So, for listeners who may not be familiar with you, tell us a little bit about yourself?

[0:03:34.8] JT: Well, I’m a lifelong musician, I think musicians listen to the world in slightly different ways to non-musicians. Actually, the research shows that musicians have slightly larger brains which is an interesting characteristic for those of your listeners who play an instrument. That’s good for you I think.

I think musicians listen to the world in a slightly different way to non-musicians. If you’re playing in a bad or an orchestra, you have a sort of multi-track listening and I’ve always had that because I’ve played in bands all my life. I had a long career in marketing ending up with a custom publishing firm I launched in 88 and grew, it became one of the most successful custom publishing firms in the UK working for clients like Microsoft and Lexus and so forth.

Producing beautiful magazines. Long time in marketing and brands and at the same time, playing music in the evenings, in my spare time. I sold that business in 2003 and finally had the opportunity to bring the two halves of myself together really, the listening half and the half that understood the needs of brands to communicate better with their customers.

The big question which came to me then was how does your brand sound? You know, brands have a great big book, they call it a  brand bible many of them. And when you say to them, okay, that defines your brand, how many pages are about sound? The answer is universally, none.

That’s a bit weird when you think about it because we experience the world in five senses, not just one, not just with our eyes. It was clear that brands weren’t thinking about the noise they were making, the sound they were making. That’s kind of why I guess we spend a lot of our time surrounded by not very pleasant noise because most of the sound that’s made in the world us is unconsciously made, it’s not planned, it’s not designed, it’s an accident, it’s a byproduct, it’s like kind of the exhaust gas of the world you know?

It just happens. We set about from 2003 where the company called the sound agency showing organizations that good sound is good business and fortunately, that’s been proved to be true. We have a business model, we have a lot of great clients, we’re doing some exciting work particularly in big spaces like airports and shopping malls.

Very often removing mindless music before any of your listeners start thinking we’re just plastering the world with music. We often remove it actually. I love music but it’s not necessarily the right sound in many spaces and instead designing acoustics and reducing noise and installing good quality sound systems and very often, creating more interesting sounds like generative sound which is like a texture.

It’s almost like white walls in a room you know, you don’t come in and go wow, look at those white walls, they just do a nice subtle job and in the same way, the sound that we make very often just does a nice subtle job in supporting people in what they’re doing in a space.

That’s really what I do in my day job now and along the way, it’s really become a big question of not just brands making sound unconsciously and not listening. I realize that we all tend to do that too as individuals. I got the opportunity to talk on the TED stage first in 2009 about how sound affects people because we’ve done a lot of research about that and then it started to morph into, considering the sounds that we all make primarily speaking of course.

And the sounds we surround ourselves with, the kind of design of our environment and also the question, why aren’t we listening.

[0:07:32.2] MB: As a starting point and this might be an overly simplified question but what is sound? How do you think about sound itself?

[0:07:40.4] JT: Well let’s define sound simply as vibration that we can hear, that’s a very practical definition. Everything’s vibrating, you know, you and I are vibrating from the smallest possible level, the strings that make up, the particles that make up the atoms that make up, the molecules and cells and so forth, every level of us is vibrating. Kind of life is vibration it’s hardly surprising the sound effects is when you think of it like that.

You’re a cord sitting there of lots and lots of vibrations all put together. Sound though is vibration we can hear, it needs a medium to carry it, that’s normally air. Although you may not know sound travels much faster through water, about twice as fast through water actually and a lot further too if we’re not making a lot of noise in the oceans.

You know whales can communicate over hundreds of miles to each other. Sound is vibration we can hear through a medium. It affects us profoundly.

[0:08:43.5] MB: What are some of the ways that sound can affect us?

[0:08:48.8] JT: I’ve distinguished four ways actually and in the last 13 years, I’ve had no need to add to any of this. I think these are pretty robust. The first is physiologically, sound changes our bodies, it affects our heart rate, breathing, brain waves, hormone secretions, all our bodily rhythms.

A very simple example is a sudden sound for example, I’ve just given you a little shot of cortisol, your fight, flight hormone, your body will do that. Any time there’s a sudden or unexpected noise or a strange unexplained noise, we interpret that as a threat.

That comes from sharing caves with tigers and bears a couple of hundred thousand years ago. You know, you had to interpret sound as threats, it was safer to do that. It’s very deep, every animal does that, hearing is our primary warning sense so we listen carefully for danger all the time.

By the same token, sound can calm you down, if any of the people listening to this have problem sleeping, my strong advice is to try the sound of gentle surf, it’s a very peaceful sound, it’s a sound which will slow the heart rate, slow the breathing and is very soporific indeed.

Sound in trains all of our bodily rhythms, if I drop you in a night club with rapid dance music, 140 beats per minute, at 90 or 100 decibels, your heart rate will immediately accelerate. We get entrained by sound around us, that’s the first way.

Second way sound affects us psychologically, of course it does. We all know that music for example can affect our feelings, our moods, our emotions. Sad music can bring us down, happy music can bring us up, we use it either to enhance a mood or to counter act a mood and it’s not the only sound that carries emotional impact actually.

Sound works a great deal of the time by association. There may be sounds from your childhood that would cause an immediate visceral, emotional reaction in you. Maybe the sound of somebody’s voice or a grandfather clock ticking or a horse clopping down a lane, these kind of sounds can mean a lot to us and at the same time, there are sounds that we all react to like bird song for example.

Gentle bird song normally means everything’s safe and sound. Most people, when they hear  bird song, they feel a sense of security. Actually, we use bird song a lot in offices and other spaces. Precisely for that reason.

It’s also of course nature’s alarm clock. When the birds are singing, it’s time to be awake as anybody who has been to a very late party knows that moment when the birds start singing is a moment when the guilt kicks in, you’re thinking it really is time to be home now. Third way sound affects us is cognitively.

Nobody can understand two people talking at the same time, think about it, you really can’t. If somebody’s talking and somebody else is talking, you go, quiet, I’m trying to listen to this person. By the same token, if somebody’s talking and you're trying to work, it’s very disturbing isn’t it?

Actually, we have bandwidth for around 1.6 human conversations. That means that if there is somebody talking next to you and you are trying to listen to that interior voice which you need when you're trying to write or do number work, it’s really degrading, it can actually cut your productivity down to just one third of what it would be in a quieter space.

Very distracting sounds will affect our cognition, our ability to be productive and to think clearly and we get very irritated in those situations. Now, of course, I know many teenagers for example or kids will say, they do their homework far better with music playing.

Music is actually quite a dense sound, they may do their homework at all with music playing, they may enjoy it, they may do it for longer, it’s very unlikely they will actually be more productive with the music playing in terms of processing an amount of work per minute.

Music, human voices, ringing phones, any kind of sounds that call a lot of attention tend to reduce our productivity quite substantially. The fourth way sound affects us is behavior really, it changes what we do. Noise for example tends to make us stressed, fought, less sociable, more aggressive, more irritable in our behavior and I think a very large factor and a lot of the adverse behavior we see in big cities because the noise levels can be so intense, the sound will cause us to move away of its very unpleasant, we may not be noticing that, we may not be noticing that, we may not be conscious of the fact that we’re moving away from an unpleasant noise like a road drill or some sort of handle bars.

We will do that if we can. Now, for people who can’t move away form it, noise is incredibly damaging to the health, you know, I mentioned the physiological reactions, there’s some terrifying numbers coming after the world health organization now about noise, they rank noise now as just behind air pollution as not just an irritant but a killer.

In Europe alone, they reckon noise is resulting in the loss of a million disability adjusted life years every year, that’s a million health a year of life lost in Europe, every year to noise. It causes increased risk of heart attack, stroke, all sorts of other health issues which are related to stress arise if we’re exposed to chronic noise and one of the biggest mechanisms of course is traffic noise stopping people from sleeping or air craft noise.

If you can’t sleep, it’s really bad for your health and there are millions of people across Europe, around eight million according to the world health organization whose sleep is being disrupted night after night by traffic noise way above the recommended maximum.

That’s a little explanation of how sound affects us and how important this is. Sadly, none of us pay attention to it, we tend to, we’ve kind of gone unconscious about it I think. Because there’s so much noise around us, we’re so used to suppressing it, I very rarely — well I’ve never heard of politician say vote for me, I’ll make the world quieter, there are no votes in noise, it’s not a big public topic unfortunately but sound is such an important thing and it’s something that we can do good with just as much as its doing a lot of harm at the moment.

[0:15:33.9] MB: That’s fascinating statistic about how many health years are lost due to kind of negative noise. How can we cultivate soundscapes that make us happier and more productive?

[0:15:46.2] JT: Well, there’s a trick to all of this Mat, the secret is simply one word. Listen. You know, we’ve kind of lost our listening a lot I think in the western world in the last couple of hundred years since the world got a lot noisier with the industrial revolution, we’re now surrounded by electro mechanical noise of all kinds and we’ve kind of gone a little bit away from the ears and towards the eyes, you think about all the communication protocols that we’ve invested over the last 40 or 50 years, email, SMS, instant messaging.

These are all text based. They’ve grabbed our eyes and our fingers and it’s now the case that many people prefer to communicate in those ways than actually to talk and to listen. We’ve kind of downgraded our ears which is a real shame. You know, your ears are amazing devices, you hear a sphere all around you, 360 degrees in all directions, sight of course is a cone in front of you. You have eyelids, you can close your eyes, you have no ear lids. Your ears are working even while you sleep.

If there’s a strange noise in your house late at night while you're asleep, you will wake up, your ears are always on. They have an amazing range, you can hear if you’ve got reasonably good hearing, you can hear 10 octaves, perfect hearing that would be. We see just one octave, the entire visible light spectrum is one octave. There’s a huge amount of sensitivity and power in the ears and I think they’re an amazing instrument and then the question is, not only do we have to hear, we have to listen as well.

My definition of listening is making meaning from sound. You hear kind of everything but you don’t pay attention to much of it probably. Listening is what you choose to pay attention to and what you make it mean.

If you do that consciously, consciously making meaning from sound, you can actually change your reality. Listening is incredibly powerful. You know, of course, reality is an abstraction isn’t it? We don’t perceive everything all the time, we pay attention only to a small fraction of what’s around us and we each make it mean different things.

For example, one thing that listeners may not have thought about is that every one of you listening to this is listening in a unique way. Your listening is as unique as your finger prints, your voice print or your irises. Every human being listens in an individual and unique way. It is a grave mistake to make the assumption that everybody listens like I do.

Which is a trap we fall in to so often. Whether we’re selling or trying to influence people or just trying to get on with people, telling somebody we love them, asking if somebody to marry us, asking somebody for pay rise. Whatever kind of conversation.

We need to be aware that we’re speaking into a listening that may be very different from our own and asking the question, what’s the listening Mat, it is an incredibly powerful technique to use in improving the way that we speak and relate to the world. Listening is incredibly important and if we start listening in a conscious way, then we can take responsibility for the sound we make and for the sound that we consume, the environments we’re in, the rooms we occupy, the noise that we surround ourselves with.

We’re unconscious, there’s nothing we can do about it when we become conscious. We can simply move away from unhealthy sound and try to create healthy sound around us all the time.

[0:19:41.6] MB: how can we become better listeners?

[0:19:44.1] JT: In my third TED talk I think it was, I talked about conscious listening and I gave five exercises, simple exercises which people can do in order to improve their listening. You know, just a level of — they’re kind of listening press ups really. You can do them very easily, they cost nothing, they take very little time and they can transform your existence.

The first one is getting a little bit of silence every day. Silence is a sound I think, it’s also the context for all sound. It’s a very important thing to reset your ears. You know, we’re surrounded by noise so often that if you can just recalibrate with a little bit of silence a few times a day, just a minute or two, maybe when you wake up or maybe at lunch time, if you can’t get absolute silence then a quiet room will do or just the quietest place you can find.

You kind of reseat your base line and you can listen afresh again without the jaded tired ears of somebody who’s been surrounded by noise all day. Most of us unfortunately have to work in open plan offices. Now, open plan offices are great for collaboration but they’re terrible for concentration or contemplation, they weren’t designed for that and the people making offices have forgotten that we’ve actually got different forms of work that we all need to do.

Quiet working space is at a premium and it’s very often the case that people go and work from home or go and camp at a board room or a meeting room to try and get somewhere quiet where they can think. Well, if that’s you, my advice is do try and find a few minutes of silence even if it means going to a restroom or a broom cupboard even, just finding that little bit of silence, it will really help you to listen afresh again.

Second exercise is one I call the mixer. This is kind of a fun thing to do if you’re in a café let’s say and you’re surrounded by a lot of different noise sources. Ask the question, how many individual tracks am I listening to? Just imagine you’re in front of a mixing desk like a sound engineer and start asking, it’s not just a mush, there are individual sound sources here.

What am I actually listening to? You can do it in beautiful natural places, you can do it in shops, you can do it any way you like. If you do it quite a lot, it will really improve the quality of your listening. Make you more acute listener, more sensitive.

Third exercise, I suggest is called savoring. Savoring is kind of unlocking the hidden choir in the good sounds around us and also becoming more aware of the bad sounds around us. There are even mundane sounds that can be incredibly beautiful that we dismiss as meaningless or try to abhor in. I remember, every sound has harmonics in it. Sound is made up of a fundamental and lots of harmonics and that’s why my voice sounds different from yours, it’s why a trumpet and a flute playing the same notes sound different, they have different harmonics.

Now, those harmonics exist, we just don’t hear them very clearly. I remember after doing a workshop on harmonic singing, I turned on the car engine and suddenly I could hear all the harmonics in the car engine, it was like suddenly seeing a rainbow. These things exist and if we become more attuned to listening carefully, we can actually unlock the hidden choirs I say and lots of different sounds. 

Turn on the kettle and listen to it closely with your ear, near the base, not the spout, you’ll get rather hot if you're near the wrong end but the sound of a kettle I think is a really beautiful powerful exciting sound if you pay attention to it. There are many sounds around us that we can really relish and enjoy and savor in that way.

The fourth exercise is quite a powerful and quite a subtle one actually. Let me explain it. I call it listening positions. Now this comes from that observation that everybody who is listening is unique, we all listen through a set of filters, that’s why your listening is different from mine. You’ve come a different road to this conversation today for my road. We have the same language roughly, we have different cultures and we have different sets of mentors.

Different parents, different role models throughout our lives where we accreted different values, attitudes, beliefs, you know, we have a different set of filters that we listen through and in any given situation of course, all of us also have probably expectations, intentions, we might have emotions going on, we might have assumptions about the world and about people, these things all filter our listening.

They change what we pay attention to and they change what we make it mean. If that’s the case, we’re listening from a particular position. I don’t mean a physical position. Imagine there’s a house on a hill and if you don’t like it, the way it looks from here, you can walk around the other side of the hill can’t you? See if it looks better form the other side. That’s the kind of metaphor I’m talking about.

Most people are listening at the bottom of that hill from a concrete bunker they created years and years ago. Probably listening through a little slit in the front of the concrete bunker to just a very small part of what’s going on. They’ve forgotten that there is actually a door in the back of the bunker, they can exit the bunker and walk to somewhere else and listen from a different position.

Maybe a couple of examples would make this clear. Let me give you a scale from critical for example to empathic. Now, critical listening is what we tend to do a great deal in our lives. In business particularly, it’s very useful, it’s extracting what’s particularly useful and relevant right now, discarding what isn’t, judging, evaluating, weighing up and saying, this is useful stuff or it’s not, I agree with this, I don’t agree with that. That’s what the listeners have been doing to me pretty much since we started this interview I imagine.

Empathic listening on the other hand is very different. That’s going on to the other person’s island, feeding their feelings and leaving them feeling not just heard but understood. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard this one but I think this is very true. It said that there are three things we desire in any relationship. To be heard, understood and valued.

Well empathic listening goes two of those in one, it’s a very powerful way to listen to somebody and of course, you know, critical listening, very useful but if somebody comes to you asking for time off for bereavement then you don’t want to be marking them out of ten and how well they’re doing this. You want to be with them on their island, feeling the feelings and showing them that you're connected at a heart level.

That’s the kind of difference I’m talking about in listening positions and I guess I’ll give you one other scale, this is a slight gender stereotype but it may be useful particularly since I think this podcast has a largely male audience, it may be useful to understand that genders tend to have different habitual listening positions.

Now, this isn’t a universal truth, I’m not saying everybody’s like this but men, tend to listen in a way I call converging, that is to say for a point, for a solution, listening to get to the end of the road, there’s a place to be, there’s an end this, there’s a point, there’s somewhere to go that’s made it worthwhile.

You know, I have a problem, I say this is the problem, you say here’s the solution, thanks. You know, that’ show we tend to converse, males. Females on the other hand tend — and I’m only saying not all females but they tend to listen in a different way and that is diverging, that is to say it’s not about a point, there isn’t a solution, it’s about enjoying the journey with the other person, going with the flow and it may expand as the conversation goes on and cover more points.

It’s not trying to focus down. We need to understand that because otherwise, she comes home and says I’ve had a dreadful day, this happened, he looks up from the football game and says, have a bath, you’ll feel much better. Now, in the male world, that’s problem solved, back to the football, in the female world, perhaps that wasn’t quite what she was looking for.

She was looking for, you poor thing, sit down, have a glass of wine, tell me all about it and that’s divergent listening, changing your listening position can be very powerful and just realizing that you can do it, that can be transformational.

The final of the five exercises I gave for improving listening is a simple little pneumonic, Rasa. Sans script word for juice, actually rasa. But in this context, it stands for receive, appreciate, summarize, ask. Little pneumonic that’s very useful to using conversation with other people, receive means pay attention.

Look at them, eye contact when you're listening, its’ very important. You know, I think M. Scott Peck said, you cannot truly listen to another human being and do anything else at the same time. I so agree with that. I think there are probably billions of people on this planet who have never had the experience of being truly listened to.

They’ve been partially listened to while people are doing something else, partly paying attention, we’re all so guilty of doing that, giving somebody your full attention and really listening to them is a great gift, it’s such a generous thing to do and it’s amazing if you do that in a relationship.

Rasa receive, that’s lean forward, look at them, you know, be it paying attention. A is appreciate little noises like really, okay. Which you’re not making right now because we’re on a podcast and you’re interviewing me and it would be interrupting me all the time but on phone calls, it’s natural to do that kind of thing because otherwise people will say, “You still there?” I get that quite often because I am intensely listening but I have forgotten to make those little noises. It summarizes the word “so” an important word. If you have a so person in the meeting it goes pretty well. 

If you don’t it could be a very long meeting. So what we’ve all agreed is this: Now we can move on to that. Without that kind of summarizing you can go round and round in circles and we all know those meetings and then asking questions of course at the end. Throughout asking questions shows that you are actually paying attention and you are interested. Rasa. So those are five simple tools and techniques that listeners can put into practice in their daily lives. 

And I promise you, they really do improve your listening skills, your conscious listening and can even change your outcomes dramatically. 

[0:30:59.3] MB: Those exercises are great and many way remind me of mindfulness for the ears and especially the distinction between convergent and divergent listening I absolutely listened to a point and try to listen to okay, what’s the next action step that we need to take as a result of this information. So the idea of listening for the journey and going along with the flow is something that I’ll absolutely implement in my own listening practices. 

I’d love to transition into another topic that you’ve talked a lot about which is the power of the human voice, tell me a little bit about that. 

[0:31:36.6] JT: Yes, the human voice is the instrument that we all play if you think about it. It’s an amazing instrument, very complex, incredibly versatile, you think of opera singers, you think of heavy metal singers, you think of town criers or great artists, people who can make you weep or laugh with their voices. It is an incredible instrument and yet we are not trained in using it. We are just expected to pick it up as we go along. 

I mean I would say the same is true incidentally of listening. When you think about it, we have four communication channels, reading, writing, speaking, listening and we teach two of them. We test two of them. Very few schools teach speaking in a serious way more in your country than mine by the way. I think Americans do get taught a little bit of public speaking. It’s expected that people can stand up in front of people and talk a bit but not in a really profound way. 

And most countries don’t even teach that and then think about do we teach listening? Not at all. It’s a silent skill, we don’t teach it, we don’t test it and we don’t test speaking in general as far as I know. So we’ve got these two very important skills which are the most natural ways that human beings can communicate. They’re the oldest ways, you know we only invented writing what 4,000 years ago? Something like that and for 200,000 years before that, we have been speaking to each other. 

Language is very, very old and so all the ways that we use our voice and yet we’ve  lost contact with that as well just in the same way that we’ve lost contact with listening skills. So this voice is incredible. You have a vocal tool box, most people are not conscious of that at all and there are lot of things in the vocal tool box that we could explore and have a little rummage about plus of course it’s what you say and they say a massive amount that if you mentioned the book I’m writing at the moment. 

A lot of the section I am writing right now is about how to decide what to say because to paraphrase the old song, it is what you say and the way that you say it. Mind you, if I had to choose between those two things I would say the way that you say it is probably the most important thing of all and so shall we open the vocal tool box Matt? Do you want to have a rummage through there? 

[0:34:09.8] MB: Absolutely. 

[0:34:10.9] JT: Okay, well there are all sorts of tools in your vocal tool box and some of them aren’t things that you might think of as associated with the voice. For example, we could start with posture. Now most people wouldn’t think of posture when it comes to the voice but if you’re listening to this wherever you are and you lean your head right forward and stretch your throat out, you’ll find your voice become really quite strained like this. 

Or if you put your head right back into your shoulders, you’ll find your voice rather odd like that. Now that’s because you’re compressing or stretching your vocal chords and they don’t work very well under those situations. In order to use your voice effectively our head needs to be vertically above our shoulders and yet how often are we sitting at our desk leaning forward, peering at our screen, stretching our vocal chords when we’re trying to have a really important conversation with somebody. 

So posture does matter. It matters a lot then the next thing of course is breathing. Now if you ever go to a vocal coach they’ll deal with your breathing first because you voice is just breath when you come down to it. It’s breath going through your vocal chords and you can modulate that breath. You can learn how to breathe more deeply. I’ll give you a simple breathing exercise that anybody can use. Lie on a bed or lie on the floor and breathe in with your hands in your stomach.

And start to concentrate on raising your fingers, your stomach up to push your fingers up. We tend to think of breathing is happening on our chest but actually if you watch a baby breathing, the stomach is what goes up and down. The chest hardly moves at all so you need to think about breathing right down into your stomach and right out from your stomach. It’s like a wheel going in, down to the stomach in and out from the stomach to the mouth. 

If you practice that more and more, you’ll become better and better at really correct breathing. We tend not to breathe much at all. We’re like little birds, we breathe just at the top of our lungs most of the time and without breathe it’s very hard to speak effectively. Incidentally for anybody who gets nervous, walking on stage in front of a lot of people breathing is also the best antidote to nerves. You know that thing when your voice goes a little bit quivery when you’re walking on? 

You’re a little bit nervous but if you take a deep breath before you go on stage that tends to go and you get calmed down and your voice stabilizes. So it’s a great antidote to nerves. So posture, breathing, the way you stand as well of course in front of people matters. Try not to fidget. Try to stand equally on both feet with everything stacked vertically above everything else, hands by your sides or hold a thumb in front of you if you don’t feel comfortable with hands by the sides. 

It’s less distracting that way and I am talking here principally if you are on stage or presenting to a room, you don’t want to be shifting your weight from side to side or walking around in that little aimless walk or any kind of physical twitch which tends to be off setting and distracting. So just being very intentional in the way you stand and in the way you move is a very powerful thing. So let’s move onto the voice itself, now there are four registers that we can speak in. 

Some people can speak in the top one, I can’t. It’s called the whistle register. Mariah Carey is very good at singing right up there. It’s very, very high indeed not very functional. The next one down, falsetto. Well I wouldn’t suggest using that if you’re trying to speak powerfully to anybody. Falsetto sounds like this, it’s the gear above where we normally are. Anybody who knows Monty Python will know falsetto, he’s a very naughty boy. 

It’s men imitating women or it’s women trying to be very, very unthreatening so it is not a very powerful place to speak from and although many singers use it, think of the Bee Gees or Chris Martin from Cold Play, I mean people singing falsetto very powerfully a lot. Nevertheless I wouldn’t suggest that it’s a great place to speak from. So onto the most common register that we use and it’s called the model register and this covers three important areas, our head, our throat and our chest. 

So you can speak with a head voice, right now I am speaking from my nose. You could probably hear it’s a little bit more nasal or I can move down to my throat here and you get a slightly harsher sound or I can move down into my chest here and resonate from my chest and then suddenly, you get the depth of the voice. You get the full range of the voice and that is much more powerful to use. So it’s a really good exercise to move your voice from head to throat to chest and back up again. 

It’s like visualizing it comes from there, it will become natural and if you want to speak in power, you want to resonate from the chest. I strongly suggest that. We tent to vote for politicians with deeper voices, that’s true. It’s been shown by the research and that’s largely because I think we associate size with importance. Big things more dangerous or more significant. Big things have lower voices. A mouse has a voice that’s so high we can’t hear it. 

A cat can’t but its way above like 40 kilohertz, way above our hearing range. Elephants on the other hand, very deep voices. So big things, deep voices, importance-deep voices so we have that association. Now there is one other register which sadly is becoming more and more popular and common and it’s called vocal fry and if you want a good laugh, you could look it up on YouTube. There are a lot of videos on YouTube of people being unkind about vocal fry and I’m not surprised. 

It’s not particularly pleasant at all, it’s kind of speaking like this, it’s very lazy. It’s not really speaking at all and it tends to unfortunately be used particularly by younger people now already. We at least talk about this, it’s so exciting, you know I am putting on an American accent because unfortunately that is largely where it comes from. Your country is specializing in vocal fry. Please, please, please anybody listening to this, try not to go into vocal fry. 

You have this amazing instrument, this voice and it’s very, very sad to be just stuck in this croaky place. It’s using the full richness of the voice that we’ve all been blessed with. So that’s register, something to pay attention to, maybe we could move onto talk about tamba. Tamba is the feel of a voice. We use feeling words, touching words to describe tamba. Most people prefer voices which you would describe in the same way that you would describe a hot chocolate. 

Rich, warm, dark, sweet, smooth and so forth, those kinds of words. Now if that’s not you, if you have a voice that’s thin or squeaky or scratchy or in any way not like that don’t despair. My advice, go get a vocal coach, a singing coach or drama coach. They would be able to help you enormously just with some simple exercises they can transform tamba and it’s amazing what you can do to improve the weapon that you have been given, the tool that you have been given. 

It can be transformed with simple exercises just as you can transform your physic with simple exercises. Then I think we should talk about pace and pitch. Now people tend not to think about these so much but if you get conscious with it, you can get really excited and go really, really fast. Some people are like that all the time and it gets to be gabble. If you get nervous, anybody listening to this, it can result in gabbling at pace and getting really, really excited and nervous. 

Now that’s not so good so be conscious of the pace you’re speaking at and sometimes, slow right down and you can make powerful points by giving it a little bit more air and slowing. The important thing actually is to vary the pace because if you are the same all the time and I’ll talk about tone right now, pitch for example can be varied enormously and I’ve just mentioned that deeper pitch tends to be associated with authority. If you vary pitch, you can vary what you’re communicating. 

The level of excitement for example so if I say, “Where did you leave my keys?” that sounds very calm. If I say, “Where did you leave my keys!” immediately there’s a different communication taking place. I’ve communicated some anxiety or some upset there just by changing the pitch. I didn’t change the pace of that delivery. So pitch and pace together can really deliver a huge amount of emotional impact and by varying them, then you make sure that you’re not being monotonous. 

Now what does monotonous mean? Monotone, one tone, if I speak on one note the whole time it’s extremely boring and robotic and I’ve lost everything there is about being a human being and communicating powerfully. I’ve lost something else as well which is prosody or intonation. The wonderful singing song of speech and again, something we can practice, it’s incredibly powerful. This is root one for emotion. 

This is why listening to a play or watching a play is so much more powerful than reading a play because you get all of that prosody, the pace pitch and so forth that you’re involved in creating prosody. Now it is cultural. Different cultures have different prosodies. Scandinavians for example have a very restrained prosody in general. “Yes, we are very excited about this project” you know? And most people would say they sound bored but they’re not. 

It’s just that they have a very restrictive prosody. I’ve done talks in Finland where at the end of the talk is a very, very muted level of applause going on. I thought oh no, I’ve tanked it. This is going really badly and people come up to me afterwards and say, “That was the best talk we have had this year” and it’s just a different way of expressing yourself. On the other hard entirely, “John all go, like this” in a huge amount of prosody going on. 

To the point where I just bang my head doing that so it is cultural and within your cultural norms it’s a great idea to work on your prosody. Practice exaggerating it if you like so that you can come across as alive and interested and interesting. So those are just some of the important aspects. I’ll mention just one more which is silence. Now you can leave great big porter. Not something that people on the radio or in podcast like doing. 

It’s called dead air and radio people get very nervous about it because they think everybody’s going to reach for the radio or whatever they’re using to listen to this piece and turn it off because they think it’s broken. Sometimes it’s a good thing but if you’re on stage let me tell you, you do not have to fill the air with “ums" and “uhs" and “ahs" and noise. You can stop for the longest time and people will stay with you. It’s fine and actually silence can be an enormously powerful way of delivering impact in any kind of speech. 

So that’s a little rummage through some of the things in the vocal tool box. I think the voice is absolutely amazing and I hope very much that I have given some pointers to ways in which everybody listening to this can work on their own voice and take on sounding even better than they do. By the way, a very good exercise is to record yourself. Get a little digital recorder or just use your phone and record yourself and listen to this on headphones. 

Most people don’t like it. You will be a bit shocked at first, “that’s not me” why? Because we hear ourselves mostly through bone conduction. So I am listening to my voice now coming through the bones of my skull and that automatically makes it sound deeper and more resonant than what goes out into the world and is broadcast by air vibrating and reaching somebody else’s ears. Pretty important to understand the way you actually sound. 

So that you can moderate that and work on it. It may not be the way that you think you sound so I hope that’s useful.

[0:47:10.4] MB: Silence is such a powerful tool and something that I’ve used again and again in things like business negotiations and meetings. Often times people get so uncomfortable with silence that they end up or feel this need to almost fill the void and continue to divulge information in many cases. So I love that as one of the tools of the vocal tool box. Could you also share another concept you talk about as the four corner stones of powerful speech. I’d love to hear those kinds of cornerstones. 

[0:47:43.7] JT: Absolutely and this is where you speak from. I spoke earlier about speaking into and listening. You also speak from somewhere, it’s kind of a spiritual place I suppose and the four cornerstones that I believe are very powerful to stand on spell a word, the word is HAIL. So it’s nice and easy to remember. It also means to greet or acclaim enthusiastically or one meaning of it so it’s a nice word to use for this. 

The H stands for honesty. Most people can spot it when people are lying, bullshitting, when you are not getting the straight story. Being honest simply in this context means being clear and being straight with people. It’s a very powerful way to be and it goes down very, very well. The A stands for Authenticity, being yourself. Just being yourself, we don’t have to pretend all the time. People pleasing can work to a degree but again people can detect it if we are denying our own truth and denying our own values in order to be liked. 

In order to be agreed with, in order to look good whatever it may be, it’s so much more powerful to be yourself whatever stage you step onto. If you can just be yourself its natural, it’s easy and it goes down well. The I is integrity and that is being your word. So if you say it and it happens, your words have power whereas if you say it and it never happens, people just stop listening to you. You lose all the power. “Yeah I’ll be there” and then you’re not or “Yes I will do that” and it happens. 

It’s a very, very different way of having your words over a period of time you generate a thing that I call “a listening for yourself”. So not only are there other people that is listening out that you speak into that listening but you also create. You co-create that. If you’re late to every meeting, people listen to you as late. “I’ll be there at two” “Yeah, yeah he won’t. He’ll be there at ten past two if we’re lucky” so you create a listening and having integrity is about being your word so you create a listening that is accurate and precise and reliable.
 
And the L of HAIL, well maybe surprisingly that’s love. Now I don’t mean romantic love obviously. I’m talking here about a kind of well-wishing. A straight forward wishing people well which is a wonderful thing to do especially if you remember that when you’re speaking to a group of people may be giving a talk or presentation or with a group of friends, it’s not about you. It’s about what you are giving to them. 

If you’re wishing them well it makes so much easier that you can look them in the eye and feel good about that the fact that you are giving them something of hopefully some value. So HAIL the four cornerstones I think is an extremely potent place to stand and to speak from and if there’s one thing to take out of that is that it’s not about you, it’s about giving people a gift and therefore, that’s what’s going to create the connection with them and have them listen to you much more attentively. 

[0:50:59.4] MB: For listeners who want to put some of these ideas into practice, what would one piece of homework be that you would give them as a starting point? 

[0:51:07.4] JT: Well you know it all comes down to listening fundamentally and I think the understanding of listening positions is probably the most important of all of these things. To understand that different people have different listening positions and so asking yourself the question “what’s the listening?” is an amazingly transformative practice whether you are speaking to one person, 10 people or a thousand people, what’s the listening? 

Every time you go into a conversation what’s the listening, asking that simple question I think is so powerful and so transformative people well may find that they get very different results pretty quickly by paying attention to that one thing. 

[0:51:49.1] MB: And where can listeners find you and your books online? 

[0:51:54.2] JT: Well I’m excited to be writing this new book, “How to be Heard” because the old book was about using sound in business and it’s kind of a textbook for that. Nevertheless I think right now I am very passionate about the idea of speaking and listening powerfully and that’s what this new book, “How to be Heard” is all about. That’s going to be coming out at the end of 2017. I’m writing it right now so watch out for that. 

My website is juliantreasure.com and I should say also anybody who’s interested in these topics of powerful speaking and conscious listening, do stop by my website a couple of times in the coming months because we are about to launch a thing called The Communication Academy which is going to be a really big body of wisdom, not just from me but for other people, resources, teachings about these very, very important topics. 

It’s all the stuff that we should have been taught in school and we didn’t get it. So I’m really keen to get it out there in the world and help people to become brilliant listeners and superb speakers. Incidentally I think Matt one thing that’s worth mentioning is that this is going to become increasingly important. Technology has been working against speaking and listening for the last 40 years or so pretty much but it’s about to start working for it. 

You know there have been billions invested in speech recognition and voice synthesis and we are at a stage now where this year we are going to have some artificially intelligent avatars which we can speak to in ways that really we couldn’t imagine a couple of years ago which leaves Siri in the dust way behind. There’s a thing called Viv coming out from the guy who invented Siri which is incredible. It writes code in real time to answer your queries. 

So this is a different kind of beast all together and I think as we start speaking and listening to our own avatar or intelligent agent a little bit like Jarvis in Iron Man, we won’t be using apps so much in the future. We’ll just tell our intelligent agent it will deal with all the apps. It will deal with all the remembering the passwords and doing stuff and we’ll be back in to having conversations and whisper it maybe even to each other. 

So I think the voice and the ears are going to be coming back into fashion over the next couple of years big time so it behooves anybody who cares about making a difference in the world, being a great parent, being a great friend, being a great leader, whatever it is you want to achieve, your voice and your ears are going to be ten times as important.

[0:54:27.6] MB: Well Julian thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing all of your wisdom. This has been a great conversation and I’ve really learned a tremendous amount.

[0:54:35.7] JT: Matt it’s been my great pleasure and I hope I’ve been able to give something of value to the people listening. So thanks so much for the opportunity. 

[0:54:44.1] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners, if you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@scienceofsuccess.co. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every listener email. 

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes because that helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt how do you organize and remember all these information?” Because of that, we created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. 

You can get it by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or by going to scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. If you want to get all of these incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we just talked about and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to scienceofsuccess.co, hit the show notes button at the top. 

Thanks again and we’ll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success.



May 18, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
KenWilber-01.jpg

Integrating 50,000 Years of Human Knowledge into a Single Comprehensive Map of Reality with Ken Wilber

May 11, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we dig into a massive framework for answers some of the biggest questions in life, ask if its possible to integrate 50,000 years of human knowledge into a single comprehensive map of reality, we look at the greatest good that a human being can achieve, we go deep on the path of “waking up” offered by thousands of years, hundreds of cultures, and what the clearest and strikingly similar paths to enlightenment are, we discuss how to integrate and understand the connections between art, morality, and science and much more with our guest Ken Wilber.

Ken Wilber is the founder of the Integral Institute which serves as a think tank aiming to synthesize all human experience and knowledge. He’s been called the “Einstein of consciousness”, and is the author of over twenty books with a focus on transpersonal psychology including A Brief History Of Everything, The Integral Vision, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality and more.

  • We dig into a massive framework for answers some of the biggest questions in life (who am I, why am I here, etc)

  • Building bigger pictures that fits all of our knowledge into a cohesive framework for understanding reality

  • Is it possible it to integrate 50,000 years of human knowledge into a single comprehensive map of reality?

  • The different paths of showing up, cleaning up, growing up, waking up

  • Most people, even experts, a completely unaware of the vast intersections of knowledge across human history and the major academic disciplines

  • The “integral” approach tries to take everything into account to provide a truly comprehensive approach to human society, life, business, ecology, politics, and more

  • The paths of “waking up” and “growing up” and why they are some of the most central and significant paths you can pursue in life

  • The two major states of consciousness that humans experience

  • Is it a misunderstanding to take ourselves as a single egoic self?

  • How every single thing and event is interwoven with the entire universe as a whole

  • What is the greatest good that a human being can achieve?

  • What is it like to have an enlightenment experience?

  • The seen self vs the seeing self? What is the observing self?

  • The synthesis of zen koans, Jesus’s teachings, and philosophy

  • The maps of “waking up” offered by thousands of years, hundreds of cultures, and what the clearest and strikingly similar paths to enlightenment are

  • All the major religious traditions describe a strikingly similar path towards “waking up”

  • Why mindfulness “resting in the witness” is the powerful path towards enlightenment

  • Religion as a mythic story that you’re supposed to agree with

  • Paths of waking up are not a “mythic story” but psychotechnologies of transformation

  • Nobody is smart enough to be wrong all the time - there has to be partial truth in almost everything that can be integrated into a holistic understanding of reality

  • The levels of human consciousness / understanding from developmental psychology

  • The great stages of human development of society mimic the develop of individuals

  • “Waking up” and “growing up” are two very different things and you can be at different places on either of those paths

  • There is some degree of truth in virtually every approach to reality you look at, how can all of these approaches fit together, how can embrace all of them in a coherent fashion?

  • Hierarchies exist, but they don’t equate to moral superiority

  • The “big three” - the beautiful, the good, and the true (art, morality, science)

  • Is the current scientific perspective too limited to incorporate and understand deeper lessons from human history

  • Dominator heirachries and growth hierarchies - and how integral development transcends and includes the previous levels

  • The goal of the integral approach is to put everything on the table and

  • Tracking the stages of evolutionary unfolding

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Video] Neuroscientist Sees 'Proof of Heaven' in Week-Long Coma

  • [Wiki Article] Jean Gebser

  • [Article] The Primordial Leap and the Present: The Ever-Present Origin - an Overview of the Work of Jean Gebser by Ed Mahood, jr.

  • [Book] Integral Meditation: Mindfulness as a Way to Grow Up, Wake Up, and Show Up in Your Life by Ken Wilber

  • [Book] A Brief History of Everything by Ken Wilber

  • [Book] Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution by Ken Wilber

  • [Book] Integral Psychology: Consciousness, Spirit, Psychology, Therapy by Ken Wilber

  • [Website] Kenwilbur.com

  • [Website] Integral + Life

  • [Amazon Author Page] Ken Wilbur

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[0:00:06.3] Announcer: Welcome to The Science of Success, with your host Matt Bodnar. 

[0:00:12.6] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performers tick with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode, we dig into a massive framework for answering some of the biggest questions in life. Ask if it’s possible to integrate 50,000 years of human knowledge into a single comprehensive map of reality. We look at the greatest good that a human being can achieve in their lives. We go deep on the path of waking up offered by thousands of years, hundreds of cultures, and with the clearest and most striking resemblances are on the different paths of enlighten. We discuss how to integrate and understand the connections between art, morality, and science, and much more with our guest, Ken Wilber.

The Science of Success continues to grow with more than 800,000 downloads, listeners in over 100 countries, hitting number one in New and Noteworthy, and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time asking me, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all this incredible information?” A lot of our listeners are curious about how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge I get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to awesome podcast, and more.

Because of that, we’ve created an epic resource just for you; a detailed guide called How to Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely free by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, it’s a guide we created called How to Organize and Remember Everything. All you have to do to get it is to text the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or go to scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email.

In our previous episode, we examined how mindfulness practices developed independently in cultures across the world, discuss how evolution shaped our brains to focus on survival instead of happiness and fulfillment. We ask what is success, how do we define it? What is the failure of success, and we go deep in how to practice self-compassion and much with Dr. Ronald Siegel. To learn proven strategies for mindfulness and self-compassion, listen to that episode. 

Lastly, if you want to get all these incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we’re going to talk about in this show, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to scienceofsuccess.co and hit the show notes button at the top. 

[0:02:47.5] MB: Today, we have another exciting guest on the show, Ken Wilber. Ken is the founder of the Integral Institute which serves as a think tank aiming to synthesize all human experience and knowledge. He has been called the Einstein of consciousness and is the author of over 20 books with the focus on transpersonal psychology including A Brief History of Everything, The Integral Vision, and Sex, Ecology, Spirituality as well as many other books. 

Ken, welcome to The Science of Success. 

[0:03:14.0] KW: It’s great to be here. I’m a fan of the show. I’m delighted to be on.

[0:03:18.5] MB: We’re so excited to have you on today. For listeners who may not be familiar with you and your story, tell us a little bit about yourself. 

[0:03:26.0] KW: Sure. I started out and went to — I’m a child of the 60s and so I tried — Was a product of that time. I also went to a standard university, started Duke University in medical program and then ended up switching to biochemistry and got graduate’s degrees on biochemistry. I found out that those really weren’t addressing the major questions that I had about my life, which are all the typical questions; who am I really and why am I here? What’s this all about? All of these kinds of silly questions. They were really urgent for me. 

I began what turned out to be kind of a life-long quest and I ended up gathering eventually several hundred scholars from around the world and just looking at these fundamental issues and we wanted to make sure that we got as complete view of this as we could. We’ve really just put almost every approach that humans have ever come up with on a table and then try to look at all of the other and see if we could read some sort of conclusions, and that ended up producing what we call integral approach or integral meta-theory. 

It turned out to have a fair amount of impact around the world and I think if nothing else, it showed people that we really can build bigger pictures that fit our knowledge disciplines together and we don’t just have to specialize and end up knowing more and more about less and less. 

[0:05:01.4] MB: That’s a great kind of intro into sort of the very high level of integral theory, and I know it’s a massively, massively deep and expansive topic. For listeners who may not have read into it or read any of your books, how would you define integral theory and what are a few of these fundamental tenants? 

[0:05:21.6] KW: Sure. One of the things that’s so interesting is as we started looking into all of the various areas, all the things that human beings have called knowledge going back 50,000 years. What was so surprising is how — What a vast and rich area it is. Really, how little most it is known, because some of the stuff turned out to be absolutely crucial. 

We’ve been doing this, myself and a team of scholars have been looking at these issues for really about the past 40 years or so now. First, we just looked at all of the areas that human beings have investigated during, basically, their entire history on the planet; scientific, spiritual, historical, artistic, moral, psychological, cultural, and so on. 

In other words, we looked at all the various maps of reality that humans have created during pre-modern times and modern times and post-modern times and we put them really several thousand major maps all on the table next to each other as it were. Then second we attempted to integrate them. That is we used all of them to fill in the gaps in any of them. The result was a really, really comprehensive map, a sort of super map if you will that really covered all or almost all of the major bases of humanities’ knowledge quest through the years. The results is what we ended up calling integral meta-theory. 

What it did was try to identify the sort of crucial components of all of these many maps of reality that humans beings have created. This gave us a framework, what is usually just called the integral framework that includes these crucial central elements. These are the elements that you want to include if you want your approach to reality to really be inclusive, comprehensive, and touched most of the important bases. That sounds a little abstract right now, but I’ll actually give some specific examples in just one moment. 

Then using this integral framework, we found that you could see many various ways that humans have approached their lives and their realities with different goals in mind. All of them have some degree of importance. They are all real. They all exist. Any of us right now can pursue any of them if we become aware of them, if we discover that they actually do exist. 

For example, people can engage in what we call showing up, in cleaning up, in growing up, and in waking up, to just name a few. These all covered different areas of reality. Again, most people don’t even know these areas are there and that you can pursue them, but almost all of them have an absolutely direct bearing on your life as you’re living it right now and what you consider yourself, what you consider important, what you consider goals, or drives. 

Again, what’s so amazing about all of these various areas is that most people are just completely unaware that they exist. Even knowledge experts who might know all about one of them are almost all totally ignorant about the others. It’s actually kind of alarming, because as we’ll see soon, each of these areas cover some truly crucial information about humans themselves and the realities that they have access to if they’re aware of them, that if we take an integral approach, of course, then we get all of these areas into account and this is why integral approach is to a topic or so sort of revolutionary as I’ll try to demonstrate. They are some of the first truly inclusive and comprehensive approaches to virtually any issue. 

So far, over 60 human disciplines had been completely reinterpreted from an integral perspective. We have, for example, integral business, integral education, integral leadership, integral ecology, integral politics, integral therapy, integral art, integral spirituality, and so on, and each case, the results are just more satisfactory. 

I thought one of the things we could do is just focus on two of these culture of an activity, what we’re calling waking up and growing up. Simply show what’s involved here with an integral approach so people can start to get a sense about what it means. These two activities are particularly interesting because they deal directly with human growth and development itself. If you take up any of these practices yourself in either growing up or waking up, it would be called a sort of self-improvement course. 

In other words, do you want to bet at yourself? These two paths; waking up and growing up, are two of the most central, most significant and most important paths that humans beings have advanced anywhere. Yet, neither the average person nor the typical academic knows anything about either one of them. Again, it’s really astonishing. 

We can maybe start with waking up and I’ll try to make very clear of what I mean here and I’ll give some experiential exercises so you can get a real sense about what this is talking about. This is a core path that we find going back at least 50,000 years to the earlier shamans and their vision quests. The idea itself is actually quite controversial and it has been controversial in almost every culture where it’s been introduced throughout history. It’s been that with fear, avoidance, resentment, aggression, violence. Indeed, hundreds of thousands of human beings have been murdered because of this topic. 

The idea itself is quite simple; human beings are said to have at least two major but very different states of consciousness or states of being that they can inhabit. One is the typical, normal, everyday, conventional state or sense of self. This is often called the ego, or the separate-self sense. The idea is that what we usually take ourselves to be, each of us, is an egoic separate-self. We’re identified with this single individual biological body. It was born a particular time. It will exist for several decades, and then it will die, and that’s it. That’s pretty much all we are. Human beings come into life, exist a while, gather a few things, suffer enormously, then die, and that’s it. 

Then humans are said also to have another state of being, or in a sense higher self. This self is actually one with all the existence, it’s one with the entire world, and its discovery marks a profound shift in consciousness and shift in identity from the skin encapsulated ego to an identity with spirit itself, or with the ground of all beings, the state of being one with literally the entire world.

Now, many writers say the leading edge science itself — the modern physics, and the system sciences — are making exactly this discovery, that every individual thing and event is actually interwoven with the entire universe in a seamless whole. It’s important to realize that this waking up is an actual and direct experience, not just an idea or a theory. 

Historically, the discovery of this higher-self or this true self was called enlightenment, awakening, moksha, satori, metamorphosis of the supreme identity, the great liberation, and it was universally held to be the summum bonum; the greatest good that a human being could achieve, the ultimate answer to questions, like who am I and why am I here? 

The pursuit of that path is what we call waking up. Waking up is a metaphor that’s widely used around the world with these traditions to try and indicate what this enlightenment experience is like. What’s like, it’s just as if you awakened from a dream and realize it wasn’t really real. To wake up in this life is to be awakened, enlightened, and to realize who and what you really are. You are not this illusory dream-like, separate and isolated ego-self. You’re actually interwoven with and directly one with the entire universe and all its many dimensions. Awakened from the dream, you are this supreme identity. 

All of the goals, and of all of the goals around the world that humans have sought, this is probably the highest or the most ultimate and we’re starting to see an increased interest in this path in the West and we have, to some degree, since around the 60s when the introduction of the Eastern meditate traditions made the very existence of the path of waking up more obvious. As I said, there’s a strong interest nowadays in trying to show that leading edge sciences are reaching the same conclusion as these ancient paths of waking up. 

As I’ll try to address, is there’s a grain of truth in that notion, but there’s also a kind of major glitch that stops it from being an alloyed truth. What is undeniably true is that of those people who have had this direct and immediate waking up satori, or enlightenment experience, well over 90% of them say that it's the most real, the most absolute experience that they've ever had and it showed them a reality whose existence that they simply couldn't deny. One the most recent got a fair amount of attention in the news, but it’s very typical, but the example Dr. Eben Alexander who's actually a neuroscientist from Harvard and he had this experience and call it “by far the most ultimately real I’ve ever had.” 

That is kind of a generic introduction to what we call this path of waking up, and we do find them in cultures around the world going back, like I say, at least 50,000 years, they tended to drop off with the rise of the modern era and — To continue the discussion headed in that direction, I’ll give a brief explanation of why they tended to drop off in the modern era, and this actually has to do the other path we’re going to talk about which is called growing up. 

To give an indication about what these waking up paths are actually like. In other words, what you experience when you have an enlightenment experience. What I'm going to do here is give a very simplified, a very shortened exercise that hopefully will give at least little experiential hint of what these paths are pointing to. 

We mentioned that virtually all of the waking up paths make a distinction between the ordinary or typical self-big-ego or the separate self-sense and our true self, or real self, which actually reaches far beyond this individual organism and is one of the entire ground of all being itself. How we can get at least a little taste of what that means? 

We can start by just having you simply describe inwardly what it is that you basically call this self of yours. Just or simply, who are you? Make a list of the things that you are. You might say, “My name is so and so. I’m this old. I weigh these many pounds. I’m this tall. I went to school here. I had this degree. I'm in a relationship now for five years. I don't have any kids. I work at this job. My hobbies are these. I drive this car. I like this kind of music, these types of books, “and so on and so on. That’s fine. You could go on and on like that. 

Notice when you're doing that there are actually two selves involved, one is the self that you can see, the self that you are engaged as describing. The self that can be an object of awareness, but the other self is a self that’s doing the describe. The self that’s doing the seeing. It’s not a seeing self, it’s the seer, and the seer could no more sea itself than a tongue could taste itself or an eye could see itself. 

What is this observing self? The real seer? Was is that? As you look for this true seer, this real self, you won't see anything. If you see anything, that's just another object, another scene. It’s not the real seer or the true subject or the real self. Rather, if you look for this real seer and you continually realize that anything can see is not it, is not the real seer, all you start to notice is a sense of vast freedom, a sense of almost complete release. It’s along the lines of I see that mountain, but I'm not that mountain. I'm free of it. I have these sensations but I'm not these sensation. I'm free of them. I have these feelings but I'm not these feelings. I'm free of them. I have these thoughts, but I’m not these thoughts. I'm free of them. I am what remains, a vast pure empty opening or clearing in which all these objects are arising and I'm free of all of them. I'm a pure witness. I’m a pure awareness itself. Not any content of awareness. 

This is why the discovery of this radically free awareness is called the great liberation, or in Sanskrit moksha which means freedom. That this real self is just a sense of pure I am’ness. It’s not I am this, or I am that, that I am this body or I am this person, which is pure I am’ness before is identified with any object or thing. This I am’ness is radically free from the entire stream of time. It’s the pure witness which is aware of time, aware of a past, a present, and future, but it’s itself radically timeless. It lives in what's called, not the passing present, but the timeless president or the timeless now moment. 

As Vichtenstein put it, if we take eternity to mean not everlasting temporal duration, but a moment without time, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present. Right, the timeless or eternal present, the now moment. This is exactly what Christ then, when he said, “Before Abraham was, I am.” 

Zen has a famous Koan, which says, “Show me her original face,” original face means your true self, this real seer  — “Show me your original face, the face you have before your parents were born.” That’s not a metaphor. That's not symbolically. They mean it literally and directly. Your true self, your original face, your real I am’ness is indeed timeless or eternal and so existed before your parents were born not because it existed in a time before your parents, but because it doesn't enter the stream of time at all. It exist in this timeless now, witnessing this present moment prior to the unfolding of time in the temporal stream entirely. 

This I am’ness is an ever present or timeless reality. It’s always there whether you realize it or not. The great traditions actually maintain that this ever present I am’ness, this ongoing witness, is the only constant and always present experience that you’ll ever have. You probably can't remember exactly what you are doing at this time a week ago, but one thing is certain, your I am’ness was there. You probably can't remember what you were doing a year ago or a decade ago, but I am’ness was there still as an ever present changeless pure witness, empty of any content. 

You can’t remember what you were doing before your parents were born either, but I am’ness is still timeless or eternal. In other words, I am’ness doesn't enter the stream of time and so it still is right now eternal or free of temporal duration as Wittgenstein pointed out, and every mystic the world over agrees with that. 

You can't remember you were doing a century ago or a millennia ago, but that was just prior time is still prior to any of that time and so eternity is still eternity and this is why the true self is everywhere called unborn and undying. It’s unborn because it doesn't have a beginning in time. It’s ever present as. It’s undying because since it never entered the stream of time it never leaves it either. That is it never stops,  it never dives. Unborn, undying. 

If you really push into this ever present witness or true I am’ness, or timeless now, at some point you'll fully break into the real timeless now and your original face will become as obvious to you as clear sunlight on a summer day. That experience is what’s called enlightenment or awakening or satori, the great liberation, the supreme identity. Virtually everybody who's ever had this profound experience agrees that it is indeed the summum bonum, the supreme good of a human life. 


That's the path of waking up and what we found as we were looking at all the maps, the territory of waking up that have been offered over thousands of years around the world by human beings and hundreds of different cultures, is that there is a great deal of similarity between these meditative maps.

Scholars such as Daniel P Brown and Dustin DiPerna have examined dozens and dozens of the various contemplative and meditative paths left by the various traditions. They found a striking degree of similarity in virtually all of them. The quick little exercise I just gave about the witness was just an attempt to give at least a bit of a tongue taste of what's involved here. 

What scholars have found is that as they look at all of the various traditions around the world, as they looked at stages the Buddhist mindfulness of Vedanta Hinduism's five levels of meditation, Zen Buddhism's Ten Oxherding Pictures, Jewish Kabbal’s seven levels the tree a life, the Christian mystics of centering prayer or St. Teresa's seven interior castles, the Sufi Stages of Spiritual States. All of these paths of waking up describe a quite similar path of higher and higher states awareness. Leading from the ego or separate self-sense as one end, to the timeless eternal, ever present, true seer, or pure witness, or I am’ness, or real self, the supreme identity at the other. 

This is really one most significant discoveries that humanity has as ever made and its existence certainly should be made known to every human being on the planet and should be part of any truly truly liberal education. One of the reasons that things like mindfulness had become so popular in the West, is that mindfulness is a good example of a practice that was originally created about 2000 years ago specifically per waking up. 

Its ultimate aim is to free a person from their limited identity with a fragmented world of samsara and the egoic-self which is inherently linked with suffering and pain and agony and open them to their real identity in Nervana that is a totally unified, whole, integrated awareness, one with the entire world, one with the ground of all being, its ever present spirit, or self, or witnessed. A path towards that ultimate enlightenment includes practicing mindfulness, which simply a technique resting in the witness. It’s a technique for being aware of each moment. Seeing it as an object an the ceasing to identify with it as a subject. 

A real awareness in Sanskrit is called neke-neke. That’s not that. I have feelings, but not those feelings. I have thoughts, but I’m not those thoughts. The more we practice mindfulness the more we practice remembering the witness, then the more distance we get from, the more we cease to identify with our present stream of experience; our anxieties and pains and depressions. The more we become awareness, and not any content of awareness. The more open and free and clear and creative we become. We closer we get to appear I am’ness which is awakening to a really radical freedom. 

This isn't anything like a typical religion that Westerners are mostly aware of which is some sort of mythic story that you’re supposed to agree with. If you do, you get to live forever in a mythic heaven with all the other really boring people in the world. This isn't a mythic belief system. These paths of waking up whether we find them in the East or West are psycho-technologies of consciousness transformation. That’s the crucial path of waking up. 

I wanted to get to growing up and I was struck by saying there’s just one little problem with the path of waking up and it actually turns out to be a truly significant almost deal breaking problem. This doesn't have to do with the path of growing up, but I just wanted to make sure. I know I've been talking pretty constantly here. If there any bit questions, are we okay? How we doing here?

[0:28:11.9] MB: Yeah, this is this is great. There're so many things I want to ask about. Before we dig into the concept of growing up, which I definitely want to talk about and I also want to hear your thoughts about the kind of the problem or the tension between growing up and waking up. I wanted to to kind of suss out one of the core tenants of integral theory that informs both your deep study of 50,000 years of human history and integrated all of these different traditions is the really simple, one of the starting points that you have is the idea that everybody is right. Will you share that concept and how that has helped inform the creation of integral theory? 

[0:28:53.8] KW: Sure. Yeah, that was the driving point. I mean if you think about it, one of the ways that I sometimes put this is no human brain is capable of producing 100% error. It can’t function if that's all it did. I sometimes say nobody is smart enough to be wrong all the time. There has to be some partial truth in virtually every concept, notion, idea that human beings have has. Even if we say, “Okay, Ed. There's a time when everybody thought the Earth was flat and the sun went around the Earth,” and so on. We can say that there were some problems with that. We can say, Yes, that's true, but there's a whole school of philosophy called phenomenology,” and that is you just bracket what’s arising in your awareness. Don't try to decide whether it’s empirically true or not. Just look at it as a phenomena itself. Look at it just as it’s arising on its own. If you do that and you sit outside and look at the heavens, that’s exactly what it looks like. The earth does look flat. It doesn't look like a globe and it does look like the sun and the moon go around the earth. Those are phenomenologically accurate. 

The question then becomes, “Okay. How would have to be the overall situation in a worldview, or in a person's overall understanding where they would see the world from just that perspective?” If we do that, then we find that indeed humanity as to individual humans go through a process of evolution. They go through a process of indeed what we’ll call growing up. They grow and evolve through various stages, various epics, various areas of development, and when they do, what they're seeing in those epics is true for that time and it makes sense if you go back and look at it from that perspective. 

If we do that and then put all of these perspectives together, then we don't just say, “Okay. Which one is right,” and all the others are wrong. We say, “No. Wait. Each of these was right at its own place and its own time as it unfolded.” This actually turns out to be important because those previous errors that humans existed 5,000 years ago, 10,000 years ago, 2000 years ago, those turn out to be epics that are reproduced if you will in the world views of influence as they grow up today. 

If we look at the great stages of human development — Jean Gebser is one of the geniuses in this and he outlined the stages of overall development. Just broad generalizations that human beings have gone through over the past 500,000 years and he turned these epics archaic, the magic, the mystic, the rational, the pluralistic, and the integral.

As it turns out those stages are exactly the major stages of growth and development that an individual goes through from birth today. Individuals are born the first year or so of life. They have an archaic worldview. From about years 1 to 3, they have a very magical primary process view the world. Then emerging at around ages 5,6, 7, they start to get a very mythic view of the world. The various developmental schools of psychology that did look at these early stages of development all agree with these different sort of early world views unfolding in that way. 

Then around adolescence, a rational capacity emerges and this is associate also with the age, the rise of modernity in the Western Enlightenment, it was call the age of reason and revolution and then if you look at the pluralistic or relativistic worldview that's associated with postmodernism. Then we’re right on the edge now where were starting to look back on all of these previous stages of development and realizing that all of them are parts of an overall path of human growth and development. All of them are partially right during the ages that they emerge. As it turns out, a human being can stop at almost anyone of those stages. 

We have grown men and women today who are 20 and 30 and 40 years old many of whom are still at a magic stage. Others are at a mythic state. Others at a rational state. Others are pluralistic. We realize it's going to go on forever, but that overall view is starting to be known as the integral view, because whereas all of this previous stages think that their view in their view truth and values are the only real truth and values in the whole world. The actual integral stage development which only a couple of decades old though, but people at that stage of development start to view all of the previous stages as being important. 

That changes everything. We’ve never had up a stage of development that thought other stages were important. If you are at a mythic traditional, mythic literal standard view from the stage, things like you believe the Bible is the literal word of God. All of these myths are absolutely. There are scientific facts. That’s a typical — It’s called mythic literal stage of development. If you’re at that stage of development, you probably belong to a fundamentalist school of one of the world's great religions and this is also called an ethnocentric stage of development because it believes that its special group are chosen people, or the one and only people that are chosen by God. Interestingly, about 60% of world population are at an ethnocentric mythic literal stage of development. 

Then as you rise up into a modern or rational stage of development, then you expand from ethnocentric to world center. World-centric believes not that just my special group alone should be given preference but that all people should be treated fairly regardless of race, color, sex, or creed. That was a huge move historically for human beings, but it was a move from ethnocentric orientation to world-centric orientation. That actually was a specific shift in our history. Believe it or not, that shift didn’t occur until a couple hundred years ago Human beings have been on this planet for close to a million years and it wasn't until a few hundred years ago that we actually figured out slavery was morally objectionable. So in a 100 year, from around 1770 to 1870, slavery was outlawed by every rational industrial modern nation on the face of the planet. First time that it ever happened, even indigenous tribes has slavery. Even all of the cultures where the great religions first arose has slavery. 

St. Paul Council's slaves, “Accept Jesus, and serve your master joyously.” The great traditions [inaudible 0:36:09.4] and Buddhism and Vedanta Hinduism still has slavery. They were good at waking up that didn't mean they were good at growing up. Growing up is that process of going through those stages of individual evolution and development and it turns out that waking up and growing up are two very different things. You can be very high on one and not very high on the other. 

Most common is historically. Most of the people who had waking up or enlightenment experiences were also ethnocentric. They existed in cultures that had slavery, and most of the slaves are different ethnic tribes. In other words they were racist. They were all patriarchal. In other words they were sexist, and they're all ethnocentric. Even though they were awakening to this ground of being, this one with all beings, they are racists, sexist, ethnocentric. That's because even though they were advanced in waking up, they weren’t that advance in growing up. There were at a mythic ethnocentric stage of development, and it wasn’t until we get to the modern rational world centric stage of development that sexism started to be called out, started to get the women's movements and so we have in today's world were to be sexist, is to be charged with a very serious offense. 

Of course, to be racist is to be criminal. This is new, the humanity. This is a product with a very high stage of growing up. The problem is each stage has both these pluses and these minuses of course. One of the problems of the modern rational stage hasn’t emerged, and it outlawed slavery, it overthrew monarchy. There were the French and American revolutions trying to introduce democracy. All of that was good but what was problematic is they looked at the previous error, the mythic-ethnocentric stage of the great mythic religions and I threw out all of them. 
They got rid of racism but they also threw out enlightenment, meaning waking up, and they got rid of sexism but they threw out awakening. They went from ethnocentric to world centric but they tossed out the great liberation. That's problematic, is that we tended to lose access to those very esoteric schools of spirituality that had advanced quite far. 

Those are usually a small portion of the culture and they were often differentiated from the great mythic exoteric religions. In the great Catholic religion, for example, most of the followers are believing in their dogmatic myths. I believe Jesus Christ is one and only biological son of the one only God and then you get to go to heaven. A very small number of them were contemplative schools of development and they were interested in waking up. Problem is the modern world didn't differentiate between those two and it threw out all of them, and so we lost access to this extraordinary road to ultimate reality into our ultimate identity with this ground of all being. 

What was same was everybody's right, is we have to go back and look at all of the truths that humanity came up with over its entire history, because those turnout in some cases do not only have truths that are still true today like waking up but they end up embodying world views that are still true today as people are born at square one and have to move through archaic, to magic, to mythic, to rational, the pluralistic, the integral stages of development. 

We still have well a recent study in this country, America, show that three out of five people, 60% were still at ethnocentric or lower. Hell, we just elected president who’s ethnocentric. He's mythic literal. He is racist, sexist, misogynistic, xenophobic. God bless him, but that's not the highest we can aim for right now. The way he’s seeing the world is exactly the way the world looks at that stage of development and that's why you can't challenge him about those and that's why he is immune to so-called facts. We find this is true for every stage of development. 

One of the things that we do with an integral point of views is we say, “Okay. If we're approaching any topic, like how should we do marketing for business, we have to look not only at just doing market surveys and all of that, but we have to realize — Look at what level of development the different markets are, because somebody who’s at a magic stage of development, somebody who’s at a mythic stage of development, somebody who’s at a rational stage of development, somebody who’s at a pluralistic postmodern stage, somebody who’s at an integral stage have very different drives, very different needs, very different motivations that empirical research on all of these and there to respond very very differently to marketing plans. You want to know what you're doing. 

What most people do in terms of marketing is they'll come up with a particular marketing plan and it's usually comes from the level of development that they themselves are at. They will appeal to people at that one level but they turn off people at the other 6 or 7 levels of development. You need to know what you're doing. We find us through at virtually any discipline. If you’re looking, for example, at spirituality, if you're looking at faith, we have empirical studies now showing that human beings go through around six or seven stages of faith, and those stages are essentially variations on archaic stage, magic stage, a mythic stage, rational stage, a pluralistic stage and an integral state. Their spirituality looks different at every stage, completely different. 

If somebody’s at a magic stage of development, they're in it for the miracles. That want to watch Jesus walk on water they want to see loaves turn into fishes, and water turned into wine. They want to see the dead raised to be living. They want to live forever in a magical heaven. As I move into mythic, and they get a more extensive cognitive orientation, than they start looking for things that are true, that are eternally true. They start looking at God's commandments and things that are important like that and they realize that they have to follow these commandments if they want to fit in and be saved basically by God himself. 

What this is really doing is moving into just a whole dimension of reality that has rules and regulations and that human beings have to adapt to and this is an entirely appropriate move at that stage of development to do that. You still think very much in mythic terms, so you think all of the myths in the Bible are literally true and you think Jesus was the one and only biological son of the one and only God. 

When you move to a world-centric rational stage, then you’ll start say, “Okay. Wait a minute. There all these other world religions and all these other world teachers and I can’t have the only one that’s right. I have a more world-centric point of view, more universal point of view.” So all of a sudden, we’re not the only chosen people. I happen to relate to Jesus Christ, so I’m allowed to accept him as my teacher but I can recognize there are other great world teachers as well. I can recognize that Buddha had important truths and chakra had important truths and so on that. 

Interestingly, the Catholic Church itself for the first time its entire history at Vatican II announced that — Paraphrasing, “We recognize that a comparable salvation can be had by other world religions.” With the first time in the entire history, they acknowledge that they didn't have the one and only true way. They moved from ethnocentric to world-centric, and that is exactly what has to happen because again with sort of 60 to 70% of the world’s population at ethnocentric levels of development. Anything resembling world peace is categorically not possible under those circumstances. Yet that dimension of things is not looked at at all. We look at it in terms of, “Oh, we have to do economic things to help the world,” or “Oh, we have to do technological things,” or “Oh, we have to do political things.” but nobody looks at these interior dimensions, and we find both waking up and growing up.

Of course, we have a lot of other dimensions and in integral is well. We look at cleaning up, which has to do things like shadow elements and we look at things like showing up which has to do with all the different sorts of dimensions of reality that we have. The guiding light in all of this is that there's some degree of truth in virtually every approach to reality you look at. The question is no longer which approach is right, and all the others are wrong. 

The real question is how can all of these approaches fit together. What framework can we adopted that actually embraces all of them and they can all fit together in a coherent fashion? That's what reality looks like, and if we’re not doing that, were really not chasing reality. We’re chasing a narrow, partial, fragmented, broken part of reality and that's a no go. That’s still what most of our professions do. It’s what almost all of our disciplines do, but we clarify find that to be a very limited approach. It certainly makes a difference as you start applying this in your life and how you live

[0:45:52.6] MB:  One of the key components that I think is really important to understand in this whole looking at different levels of development is the idea that hierarchies do exist but that they don't necessarily equate to moral superiority and that each hierarchy to evolve has to sort of transcend and include the levels below it. Could you talk a little bit about that idea? 

[0:46:17.3] KW: Sure. One of the problems with just the whole postmodern movement in general, and postmodernism was named because it came after modernity. Modernity generally means the period starting around 1600-1700 in the West where we had the rise of almost all the modern sciences, modern chemistry, modern biology, modern physics, modern astronomy and so on and we had so-called Western Enlightenment, which is called the age of reason because it moved primarily into using rationality and scientific investigation instead of simply mythic revelations. 

That was a profound period in human development obviously, and because it was thinking in sort of third person rational terms, then it tended to think in terms of universal realities. That’s why it looked at human beings as universal individuals. They had universal rights. Not just rights if you were a Catholic, or rights if you were Jew, or rights if you belonged to this race, or this group, or that class and so on, but rights that you had and just being a human being, a universal human being. That's why slavery was ended and so on. 

That were downsides as I said with each era, and one of the downsides with the modern era is that it just pushed rationality itself too hard. Even in the  great distinction of the good true and the beautiful, the true was represented by rational objective truth, but the good was moral reasoning in moral judgment, and beautiful was aesthetic judgments, and rationality ended up sort of pushing all of those out the window. 

We started to get what was called not just science but scientism, or often called scientific materialism where all of the interior realities, consciousness, awareness, morals, emotions and so on, were thought not to be really real. Just what can be rationally and objectively observed in a scientific experiment is real and that pretty much came down to just material atoms, almost everything else is denied reality. 

The rise of postmodernism which really started around the 1960s and it started as — First of all, it was a higher level of growth. It was a pluralistic stage, which was a stage that became aware of the previous rational stage and found some of its limitation. That's why it’s generally called postmodernism. It’s also called post-rationalism. It came after rationality and attempted to open it up and that's why also we started to get was called multiculturalism, where it’s understood that not just Western Eurocentric culture has the only real truths, but cultures all over the planet have their own unique truths and they need to be honored as well. 

We got the whole Civil Rights movement, we got the acceleration of personal and professional feminism, we got the whole environmental movement and so on. One of the problems with a pluralistic or postmodern stage was because it started to try and sort of include everything but it didn't make distinctions. In others, if you're looking at, let’s say, being inclusive, as being a good thing, which postmodernism did, it didn't look at the fact that there are stages of inclusiveness. Each stage is more and more and more inclusive. Conversely, the lower stages actually less inclusive, that there's actually some problems with those. They tend to be egocentric and ethnocentric. There not world-centric. 

Postmodernism came short of making that distinction and the reason is they confused the types of hierarchies. Postmodernists thought that all hierarchies were dominator hierarchies. Dominator hierarchies are like the cash system or criminal organizations. The higher you go in that hierarchy, the more people you can oppress, the more people you can dominate. The postmodernist thought that all hierarchies, all ranking, all levels of any sort of ranking were dominator hierarchies. They're all oppressive and they all cause enormous social suffering and social ills. 

They didn't distinguish between dominator hierarchies and growth hierarchies. Growth hierarchies, each higher level is more inclusive and less domineering, not the other way around. It’s just the opposite domineering hierarchies. A typical growth hierarchy we see in evolution itself. We go from, quarks, to atoms, to molecules, to cells, to organisms. Each one of those transcends but includes the previous one. It doesn't oppressive. Molecules don't hate atoms. Molecules are not domineering atoms, they're embracing. They actually include them. If anything, they love them. 

Most of the developmental schemes we’re talking about; archaic, to magic, to mythic, to rational and so on, and mostly developmental schemes that developmental psychology looks at, those are all growth hierarchies and it’s only the higher stages of growth hierarchies that you overcome dominator hierarchies. All growth hierarchies move from egocentric, to ethnocentric, to world centric, to integrated. It’s only at world-centric that you stop wanting to domineer and dominate. 

The only cure for dominator hierarchy is a high level of growth hierarchy. People at low levels of growth hierarchies use dominator hierarchies. Even then in growth hierarchies, as you’re saying, you have to be careful because simply the fact that you have a higher level — Higher something means like atoms, molecules, cells, it means that the cognitive structure of a higher level includes all of the components of the previous level, but then adds something extra. 

Therefore is bigger, is wider, is higher, whatever term you want, but it doesn't always necessarily mean it's better because this higher stage can still make mistakes. It can still create problems. It can still deny or if it has in a psychological being. If there are various thoughts or various feelings that you're frightened up or judgmental or afraid of, you can repress them. You concealed them out. The higher you go the more capacity you have for doing that because cognition gets stronger and stronger.  Higher not only means higher potential capacities, it also means higher potential problems. Inherently, the problems at one stage are solved only by the next higher stage and it introduces its own problems and those can be solved again at the next higher stage and so on. 

Growth hierarchies are one most important discoveries that humanity has made. Again, as you look at all the various maps around the world and look at how they broke down, you can see once that were dominator hierarchies and you can see once that were growth hierarchies, and the growth hierarchies always were involved in creating more moral, more sustainable more benign, more goodness, more truth more beauty, and dominator hierarchies were always concerned with oppression and domination and suffering, slavery and on and on and on.

Again, what’s been such a problem with postmodernism in the last 40 or 50 years since it became into being with the 60s is that it didn't allow growth hierarchies and it basically denied all hierarchies, and that was ironic because pluralistic postmodernism itself is the result of five or six levels of a growth hierarchy. Nobody is born a pluralism, you're born at archaic and you have to develop to the hierarchical stages of magic, to mythic, to rational and finally to pluralistic. When the pluralist turn around and said, “Everything is equal. There’s nothing but egalitarianism. All values are the same.” Then they cut out the path of growth to their own level of awareness. They killed growth entirely and that's effectively what we got from postmodernism is it stopped acting as a leading edge in development and that has been just really kind of a disaster across the board. Enormous number problems that the world is facing now around the around the world results from just that. 

What we’re trying to do just with sort of integral approach is put all of these things on the table and make sure that we are looking at not just what people say or do the opinions that they have, or the belief that they hold, but that we also understand the context that those beliefs are coming from, that we take a genealogical approach, that is we actually look at the genealogy of these ideas at the stages of growth and evolution and development that has occurred, because evolution seems to touch pretty  much everything. Tracking the stages of evolutionary unfolding becomes really crucial in this whole approach. Again, virtually any area we’re looking at. 

[0:56:13.3] MB: This is obviously an extremely vast and complicated topic. For our listeners who want to be able to kind of dig in and get a little bit deeper into some of the fundamentals of integral theory, where can they find you online and kind of what’s a good starting place? 

[0:56:32.1] KW: Sure. I've got about 25 books and they're all still in print and you can get any of them on Amazon. They’ve been translated in over 30 foreign languages. They’re pretty widely available and people can just do that. You can also just Google integral and you’ll get plugged-in to sort of a worldwide movement that’s looking at these areas. Website, a place to start might be integrallife.com. We threw a pretty wide web there. We included a lot of different approaches but the core guiding principle of the website is the integral interview and there a lot of discussions and dialogues by me and articles and essays and so on. People can follow up there if they wish.

[0:57:15.8] MB: Ken, thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing all these wisdom. I know that integral theory is such a fascinating concept, the idea of integrating the entire history of human knowledge into a piece of framework to understand and explain reality is a massive undertaking. I know that in the limited constraints of a one-hour conversation, there's no way we can even really scratch the surface of it.

I really appreciate you sharing some of these core concepts and we’ll definitely put links to all you books and everything in the show notes for listeners so they can check those out. 

[0:57:51.0] KW: Great. Awesome. 

[0:57:52.2] MB: Thank you very much for being on the show. We really appreciate it. 

[0:57:54.8] KW: Thank you Matt. Thank Austin. I appreciated it. 

[0:57:57.2] MB: Thank you so much for listening to The Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story, or just say hi. Be sure to shoot me an email. My email is matt@scienceofsuccess.co. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every listener email.

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend, either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes, because that helps more and more people discover The Science of Success. I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all these information?” Because of that, we’ve created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. You can get it by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222, or by going to scienceofsuccess.co, that’s scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. 

If you want to get all these incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we just talked about and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. You can get them at scienceofsuccess.co and hit the show notes button at the top. 

Thanks again, and we’ll see you on the next episode of The Science of Success.

May 11, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
PaulBloom-01.jpg

Are Babies Racist? Is Empathy Bad for Society? And More with Dr. Paul Bloom

February 23, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion, Decision Making

In this episode we start with a dive into evolutionary psychology and how biases have been programmed into you by millions of years of evolution, look at why our guest condemns the concept of Empathy, how the science demonstrates that empathy has no correlation with doing good in the world, how empathy creates disastrous outcomes, and more with our guest Dr. Paul Bloom

Dr. Paul Bloom is a Professor of Psychology and Cognitive Science at Yale University and received his PhD from MIT. Paul is the coeditor of the journal Behavior and Brain Sciences and author of several books including Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil, and most recently Against Empathy: The Case For Rational Compassion.

  • We dig into Paul’s research on babies and their innate sense of right and wrong

  • A surprising and extremely powerful source of bias that babies innately have

  • The in-group vs out-group and how babies slice up and divide the world

  • How dividing a group by coin flips can create serious behavioral biases towards your own group

  • Evolutionary psychology and how biases have been programmed into you by millions of years of evolution

  • The morality of evolution and how kindness evolved

  • How people, from an evolutionary point of view, think about strangers

  • The definition of empathy and how Paul defines it

  • Why Paul criticizes the concept of empathy

  • Why feeling the feelings of others is a really lousy moral guide

  • Why the science shows that empathy has no correlation with how much good people do in the world

  • What happens when soccer fans see someone shocked and how theyre brains respond completely differently if its a fan of their team vs their opponents team

  • How our natural empathy response is riddled with extreme bias

  • How empathy creates disastrous political outcomes

  • The "Willy Horton incident" and how the empathic response resulted in more rapes and murders

  • Why Paul says controversially that mass shootings are objectively less than a rounding error

  • Why being against empathy doesnt mean we should turn into cold blooded monsters

  • The distinction between empathy and compasion and why its so critical

  • How buddhist philosophy lead Paul to move away from empathy and towards compassion

  • Why its so critical to be aware of your biases before you can shift them and overcome them

  • Why we are more than just our biases and limitations

  • Pauls vision for the human future and how an awareness of our biases is critical to build a future where rational and logical thinking can move us to a better future

  • And more!

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion by Paul Bloom

  • [Book] Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil by Paul Bloom

  • [Twitter] Paul Bloom

  • [Yale Bio] Paul Bloom

  • [Article] Empathy and compassion by Tania Singer and Olga M. Klimecki

Episode Transcript

[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[00:00:12.4] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study, and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind in what makes peak performance tick with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode, we start with a dive into evolutionary psychology and how biases have been programmed into you by millions of years of evolution. We look at why our guest condemns the concept of empathy, how science demonstrates that empathy has no correlation with doing good in the world. How empathy creates disastrous outcomes and more with our guest Dr. Paul Bloom. 

The Science of Success continues to grow with more with more than 780,000 downloads, listeners in over 200 countries, hitting number one in New and Noteworthy, and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time asking me, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all this incredible information?” A lot of our listeners are curious about how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge you get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to awesome podcasts, and more.

Because of that, we created an epic resource just for you. A detailed guide called How To Organize and Remember Everything. You can get it completely free by texting the world “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, It’s a guide we created called How To Organize and Remember Everything. All you have to do to get it is to text the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or go to our website, scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email.

In our previous episode, we discussed the paradox of happiness, why pursuing it makes you less happy, and what you can do about it. We dug into the research about what really makes people happy. We broke down happiness into its essential components and discussed how to cultivate it, and much more with our guest Tal Ben Shahar. If you want to live a happier life, listen to that episode.

[0:02:20.8] MB: Today, we have another exciting guest on the show, Paul Bloom. Paul is a professor of psychology and cognitive science at Yale University and received his PhD form MIT. He is the co-editor of the journal Behavior and Brain Sciences and the author of several books including Just Babies, The Origins of Good and Evil, and most recently, Against Empathy: The case for rational compassion. 

Paul, welcome to the Science of Success.

[0:02:45.1] PB: Hey, thanks for having me on.

[0:02:46.9] MB: Well we’re very excited to have you on here. For listeners who may not be familiar with you, tell us a little bit about your background and your story.

[0:02:54.3] PB: I’m Canadian, born in Montreal. For a long time I thought I’d become a clinical psychologist and treat children. My brother’s autistic, which is why I got into psychology, but I began to become increasingly entranced with broader philosophical questions and experimental research.

Now, I’m a professor at Yale University in New Haven, I study babies, I study adults, I study toddlers in between, and in between doing experimental research, I write books and articles for a popular audience.

[0:03:22.4] MB: I’d love to begin by diving into some of the research that you’ve done on babies, which I find really fascinating. Would you share kind of some of those findings?

[0:03:29.6] PB: Yeah, absolutely. This is work done in collaboration with my colleagues at Yale, particularly Karen Wynn who is my wife and collaborator. She runs this infant lab and we do all sorts of experiments on babies looking at their social understanding, their physical understanding, and recently about their moral understanding; their understanding of right and wrong. 

This might seem crazy to talk about a six month old having a moral understanding but we discovered some really cool things. For instance, you can show babies a one act play where there’s somebody trying to do something like trying to get up a hill. Then a good guy comes and gently nudges our character up the hill. Then another guy comes, a bad guy, and shoves him down. If I was to ask you, show you the film, and you can look at online on my webpage, if you looked at the film you’d say, “Well, yeah, one guy’s a nice guy, the other guy’s a jerk.” 

So we wanted to see what babies felt about this. You can’t ask babies, they can’t tell you but they do all sorts of things. We found out that babies prefer to reach for the good guy than for the bad guy. They prefer to give treats to the good guy or versus the bad guy. They prefer to take away treats from the bad guy over the good guy. That’s just one example. We’ve done many experiments of this sort and it finds that babies long before their first birthday have some sort of understanding of right and wrong. 

Other studies find that babies have some sort of compassion. They like to help others, they like to support others. One body of my research explores the moral powers of the baby. At the same time though, the morality we have inborn with us, the product of evolution is in some ways very limited. Babies don’t have a natural compassion for strangers, they are insensitive to sort of moral insights like the wrongness of slavery or racism and sexism.

After writing my baby book, Just Babies, and after thinking about this issues, I began to struggle with the question of what makes us different from babies and what makes a person a good person? That led to a lot of my work now on empathy and the emotions.

[0:05:37.4] MB: So, do babies have a kind of initial or in-born prejudices and biases?

[0:05:43.5] PB: They do and they don’t. It’s not like a baby is born and, you know, doesn’t like black people, or doesn’t like gay people, or Asian people. Babies don’t have any specific biases but they are very quick to develop them. Very early on, for instance, babies prefer to look at people who look like those that they’re raised with.

A baby who is raised with all white people will prefer to look at white people, all black people look at black people. In one study involving Ethiopians in Israel, babies get to look at white people and black people, those babies don’t show any preference.

It’s not just sort of looking and you can say, “Well who cares about what babies like to look at?” Later on, these preferences manifest themselves in all sorts of biases like who they prefer to interact with, who they prefer to give toys to. Some of the best work has looked at a really surprising source of bias that’s extremely powerful. More powerful than gender, more powerful than race, and it’s language.

Very early on, as young as you can test, babies prefer people who speak the same language that they do and they prefer to interact with them, they prefer to make friends with them. Even a slight accent pisses babies off and they prefer to go for somebody who doesn’t have the accent. Of course you see the same sort of biases in adults. Although for adults, It’s more complicated, adults view some accents better than others. 

But one reason why we believe that language is so important for the baby is that language is a wonderful queue to social group and if somebody speaks a different language than you or even a different accent, it’s an excellent indicator they’re not from your community. Because babies are extremely prone to split the world up into “in group” versus “out group”, they look towards language as a way to do it.

[0:07:27.3] MB: Tell me a little bit more about the kind of in group, out group distinction and how babies draw that?

[0:07:33.7] PB: Well, the question could be asked about babies and could be asked about you and me. There’s no human who is perfectly impartial from one group to another. There’s nobody who loves their own child to exactly the same extent that they love someone else’s child. There’s no one who doesn’t feel more of a connection to their friends and their lovers and their family than to strangers. We split the world up to “in group” and “out group” and that way, we split it up into countries, we split it up into ethnicities and to clubs.

One of the findings from baby studies is that babies are extremely willing to do so. They come in predisposed to break the world into us versus them. You can demonstrate that in the most minimal ways. One experiment that’s been done with adults, has recently been extended to kids. You just randomly put them up. You say, you guys, for adults who say, “Let’s flip a coin. Heads go in this corner, tails go in this corner.” It’s utterly random, it’s obvious it’s random, for kids, you hand out different colored gloves and it turns out, even this ridiculously small manipulation ends us splitting people up has a powerful effect. 

We prefer our own group even if it’s just a heads group or the tails group. The yellow gloves or the blue gloves group. We like to give them more and we are happier punishing the other group. One of the aspects of human nature which I think is caused, maybe the most trouble is present from the very get go.

[0:09:02.9] MB: I think there’s a study that you’ve talked about in the past revolving around kind of babies and graham crackers or something like that. I’d love for you to share that research example.

[0:09:12.0] PB: This is some work done by Karen Wynn. You do a study where babies get to choose between two things they like and I think — I forget exactly. I think they’re graham crackers versus cheerios. Babies, you know, like one versus other, whatever. They choose one. Then they want someone else to make a choice and the weird thing that you wouldn’t have expected as babies are very sensitive to what the other person does.

They like when somebody chooses the same thing that they do and they get annoyed when somebody doesn’t. In some of the studies, they get so annoyed when somebody chooses something different. I choose graham crackers, you choose cheerios, they get so annoyed that they want to see that person punished.

And Karen in her work sees this as a sort of grounds for ideological conflict later on where as adults, we can get enraged when someone makes different choices from us. Now, when the stakes are very high, like going to war or abortion laws or whatever, that’s kind of understandable. But even when the stakes are ridiculously low, we freak out. This too I think is part of our initial equipment.

[0:10:22.0] MB: For listeners who may not have as good of an understanding of kind of the concept of evolutionary psychology and how this biases sort of get programmed into us via evolution, I’d love for you to just kind of explain that concept.

[0:10:36.0] PB: Well, just like our bodies, our brains are the products of natural selection. What this means is, the fact that we think the way we do that we have to taste and motivations and desires that we have is to a large extent because our ancestors who did this reproduced more than those that didn’t.

This is pretty obvious for some things. It’s kind of a no brainer why people like sex. People like sex because their ancestors who didn’t like sex or would rather copulate with a rock or a tree didn’t produce offspring while their ancestors that did like sex did considerably better at producing offspring, it’s why we love our children. 

If you didn’t love your children, if you ate your children, well, your children won’t do too well in life. It’s why we prefer to drink water than to eat mud, a lot of our taste and desires at the low level make perfect sense for a creature that’s been evolved through survival and reproduction. This pertains to morality as well. It was one thought before the time of Darwin, that evolution is sort of red and tooth and claw; evolution is a relentlessly selfish force, making us care only for ourselves. We know and Darwin knew that his is nonsense. 

Evolution makes us kind because creatures who are kind in certain special ways, like favoring their family over their friends, engaging in long term alliances and mutual benefit. Animals like that do better than animals that don’t. If you and I were in the Savannah and you cooperated with people and helped them out and took care of your family and all I cared about was myself, well your genes would do better than mine. 

Evolution has shaped our morality as well but this is kind of a tragic part because from an evolutionary point of view, who gives a damn about strangers? Strangers are nothing. Strangers are at best potential threats and so the fact that we right now recognize that we owe a moral obligation to the strangers, we can’t kill them, we can even help them under some circumstances.

Suggest that we’ve used our intelligence to transcend evolution. Of course we do this all the time, we evolve perceptual systems that allow us to look over the world and see trees and water and so on. But through science, we understand what we’re really seeing are objects that are composed of tiny particles and fields of energy.

Similarly, we have a sort of stone age morality that’s evolved through evolution but we’re also smart enough to transcend it. The user are capacity for introspection and for generalization and logic. To realize that some of our innate morality’s unfair and capricious and that we could do better.

[0:13:19.5] MB: I think that really dove tails into your somewhat controversial view on the concept of empathy. Before we kind of dive into that, I’d love to understand, how do you define the concept of empathy?

[0:13:32.3] PB: Yeah, that’s a good question because people see the title of my book Against Empathy and they freak out. I have a collection of emails like you wouldn’t believe. I think it’s because it has different meanings. One of the issues.

Some people use empathy just to mean everything good. We should have more empathy means we should be kind, we should be loving, we should be moral and I have no objection to that. Other people use empathy in a narrower sense, having an understanding. I don’t have an objection to that either.

Although, understanding other people is morally neutral. You do need to understand other people to make the world a better place. You also need to understand other people if you’re going to seduce them or calm them or torture them or bully them.

The sort of empathy I’m interested in is putting yourself in someone else’s shoes. Seeing the world as they do, feeling their pain and a lot of people have argued, this is really fundamental to morality. Empathy serves as a spotlight that zooms us in on people and makes them matter. What I argue in my book is that this is mistaken.

That empathy has all sorts of terrible effects. It makes us biased because we empathize with those who look like us and who are attractive and who belong to our group over others. It’s innumerate because empathy makes us value the one over the many, and at least capricious and arbitrary and often cruel acts. A lot of violence is prompted by empathy for a victim. At least the stupid policy decisions. It’s because of empathy that governments and populations care more about a little girl stuck in a well than they do about a crisis like climate change.

Even in personal relationships, empathy can mess you up. An example I like to think about, because it’s from my own life is that if my teenage son comes up to me and he’s freaking out because he hasn’t done his homework and it’s due tomorrow and he’s very anxious. I’m not being a good father if I feel empathy from, I feel his anxiety and I share his anxiety and get anxious myself. I’m best as a parent if I have some distance, if it’s a, “Dude, calm down, let’s take a break, let’s go for a walk,” and I love him and I understand him but I don’t feel what he feels. 

I think it’s the same for friendships, it’s the same for romantic relationships. If I’m really depressed, I don’t want my wife to see me and get depressed herself. I want her to try to cheer me up and try to make my life better. What we want from people and what makes it a better world isn’t echoing their feelings. It’s responding lovingly and intelligently to them.

[0:16:06.5] MB: Your definition is empathy is essentially the feeling of sharing the emotions or kind of actually feeling the pain or whatever someone else is feeling as opposed to this sort of broader understanding that might encompass compassion and other things that are sort of, could be defined as distinct from looking at it from kind of the psychology literature.

[0:16:29.1] PB: That’s exactly right. I’m using it the way a lot of people in the field use it. I’m not the language police. I’m totally comfortable with empathy anyway they want. Some people use empathy to fold together all sorts of things, some that are good, some that are bad. 

The point of my book, the point of my argument isn’t about how to use the words. It’s about how we should live our lives and the case I make is that feeling the feelings of others, whatever you choose to call it is a really lousy moral guide, it leads to messy policy, it leads to bad relationships and we’re so much better when we try to understand people, when we care for people, when we care about people but we don’t feel their pain.

[0:17:14.7] MB: When people hear your stance about empathy, what are some of the kind of typical reactions?

[0:17:21.3] PB: I’ve been making this argument for a while and I’ve gotten some great responses, some very intelligent responses. People will argue that maybe empathy isn’t perfect but without it, we couldn’t be moral people if we didn’t feel other’s suffering, we’d never be motivated to help them.

People argue that those without empathy are cruel people, they’re psychopaths, they’re monsters, people argue that children start off being empathic and then compassion and other things and learn from it, it’s an important start and there’s many other arguments and I think it turns out that all of them are mistaken. I think for instance, there’s a lot of evidence that you could be kind to somebody and care about them and you can also want to make it a better world in general without feeling empathy.

It turns out there’s been a lot of research where you measure people’s empathy and then you see, how does that connect with what kind of good person they are? The answer is, it doesn’t. If I wanted to know whether you’re going to try to rob me or kill me or even just you know, talk badly about me. Your score on empathy test will tell me very little, actually, pretty much nothing.

The real predictors of bad behavior in people are a kind of malicious nature and lack of self-control. Empathy in whatever sense, feeling the pain of others, understanding others seems to play no role at all in good behavior or bad behavior.

[0:18:49.6] MB: That’s the finding that’s backed up by a lot of science right? It’s not just kind of conjecture.

[0:18:54.6] PB: Absolutely. There is an industry involving testing people’s empathy and looking at the relationships between their behavior, there’s a lot of research where you put people in FMRI scanners and you look at the brain responses, reflecting to empathy.

One of the cool findings for instance is, you know, there’s this metaphor I think made most famous by Bill Clinton where you say I feel your pain. It turns out, we literally feel other people’s pain. If I was to watch you get stabbed in the hand and my brain was wired up to an FMRI machine, it would reveal that parts of my brain would light up, that would be pretty much the same parts that would light up if my own hand was being stabbed.

There’s a lot of research on this. The research shows what I’ve been saying, the research shows that the individual measures of empathy don’t predict good behavior, bad behavior, they show that the neural measures of empathy are tremendously biased. This brings us back to the in group, out group work we were talking about before.

They did a study in Europe where they tested European soccer fans, you’re sitting there, your brain is all being measured and you want somebody else being shocked and half the people are told, “You see this guy being shocked? He’s a fan of your soccer team.” Turns out, when you do this, people say, they feel high empathy and their brain’s reflective. Parts of the brains light up that correspond to empathy.

Then, in another group, they’re told exactly the same thing but they’re told, “See this guy? He’s a fan of another soccer team.” You do that, the neural correlates of empathy shut down, you don’t feel empathy and in fact, you watch him be shocked, you feel a bit of pleasure. The studies confirm what we knew from other sources which is how incredibly biased empathy can be.

[0:20:39.2] MB: I’d love to dig in a little bit more to kind of the bias effects on empathy and you know, things like racial bias et cetera and how they can impact or how empathy can kind of negatively create outcomes.

[0:20:51.6] PB: There’s bias in a couple of ways, there’s sort of a natural bias we carry with us. One study looked at people’s empathic reactions to suffering of those they found disgusting, like homeless people or drug addicts. It turns out, the empathy is just silent. If someone grosses you out, you don’t feel their pain at all, you don’t feel anything for them.

Others studies find that attractiveness plays a real role. If there’s an attractive eight year old girl, a pretty little eight year old girl and she’s in pain, you freak out, you feel great empathy. Someone less attractive, someone maybe a bit scary, no empathy at all.

Our natural empathic responses are biased and similarly, empathy can be moved around by politicians, by rhetoricians, by people who want to make a moral point, to try to get you to feel empathy for this person or that person. Sometimes it’s done for causes you might think of as good, like when you direct a lot of concern and focus on the drowned Syrian child.

Where you say, “Look, you used to feel great empathy for his family and the suffering must have gone through. So let’s use that to motivate some good policy.” But often, empathy is directed to get you to hate people. If I want to get you to support attacking some other country or expelling some group from the United States. One excellent way to do so is to tell you about this group’s victims and get you to feel empathy for them.

It’s an observation as old as the Adam Smith in the 1700’s, which is when you watch somebody suffer, you feel empathy for them, you feel commensurate rage for those who have caused that suffering. This is no secret among those who want to motivate cruelty and violence.

[0:22:30.9] MB: You touched on a number of examples in the past of ways that empathy can negatively impact public policy. I’d love to hear the story of, I think it’s Willy Horton, or some of the other examples that you’ve shared previously about how kind of one story of empathy can lead us to make what ends up being a really terrible decision.

[0:22:52.4] PB: There catalytic examples of this, you might say that right now, going through the politics that we’re reeling with at this very moment; bailing out a company because you feel bad for its workers may have great short term effects for the workers and then sort of scratch your empathic itch but have horrible long term effects in the future.

Let’s go to the Willy Horton case. The Willy Horton case from the 1980’s, it came up during the presidential election between the competition, between Michael Dukakis and his republican opponent and what came out was, when Dukakis was governor, he had a furlough program and then the furlough program where prisoners are released for a little while, someone named Willy Horton was released. 

Willy Horton went out and did some terrible things; he raped somebody, he assaulted somebody and Willy Horton was a large and threatening African American. So his opponents put pictures of Willy Horton everywhere. As soon as this incident happened, furlough program was shut down. Dukakis was condemned to apologize for it over and over again while people were stoked up by the terrible things that this man had done. 

Now, it turns out that this for a little program by most measures made the world a better place. That is, even including the crimes that were done by prisoners released and furloughed, the fact that the furlough program exists led to less crime overall and so a rational person would say, “Well let’s do the numbers, apparently the furlough program is doing good.” But that’s not how we think. That’s not how the mind works. With the mind, we are swayed by these sympathetic cases. 

Our empathy is triggered and so we end up doing acts like shutting down the furlough program that in the end cause more harm than good. I mean another example just to get you thinking about is a hypothetical example where imagine there is a vaccine program and a little girl gets very sick. We’d probably shut down the program even if a dozen people are saved by the program each year because you could empathize with the suffering of a little girl who gets sick and her family and everything. 

But you can’t empathize the suffering of people who would have got sick but didn’t. Empathy works in the here and now. It feeds off real cases of suffering and ignores other considerations or take a third example, which is an example I begin my book with, which is school shootings, mass shootings. I begin my book with the story of Sandy Hook Elementary School in New Town, this horrific mass murder of 20 children and I point out that this causes an enormous amount of focus and concern. 

And many people would view it as the biggest policy problem we have but it also turns out that when it comes to murders, to homicides in the United States, mass shootings take up about 0.1% of them. What that means is if you could snap your fingers and make it so that there would never be a mass shooting in the United States again, nobody would notice. It would be indistinguishable from random noise and so these are cases where a good, wise, compassionate policy maker says: 

“I’m going to ignore the pull of my emotions. Particularly I’m going to ignore my racists bias, I’m going to ignore these things that really cause my tears to flow and ask myself the hard question of how to make the world a better place,” and I think these are cases where empathy leads us astray. I think there’s individual cases, there’s cases of charitable giving, there’s a lot of people who give to charity and I used to be one of them and still am to some extent. 

Where I give to things for some sentimental reasons, for the cuteness of the picture, for personal connections and this is a lousy way to do it. When we give to charity we shouldn’t be trying to give ourselves a warm glow or happy buzz. We should be trying to make the world a better place and so I’d like to see a shift away from empathy based decisions towards decisions that are based on reason. 

[0:26:43.0] MB: And, you know, it’s funny, the example that you give at the beginning of the book about mass shootings and I think it was 500 deaths from that in the last 10 years or I don’t remember the exact stats, but that made me think of another instance. I was watching the news the other day and they were arguing about terrorism and they threw out the stat of how many people have died from terrorism in the United States in the last 10 or 15 years and it was 150 people. 

I mean it was a staggeringly low number when you think about the fact that it’s such a huge focal point and that example and the Willie Horton example for me, of course when I picked up the book I think I had the reaction to everybody. It was like, “Why is this guy against empathy?” and the more I start understanding that and those concepts of how this one vivid story, which can really mislead us into making what are objectively worst decisions for our society. It was pretty fascinating. 

[0:27:43.2] PB: I find these stories very moving in how they illustrate in how we can go wrong and it’s not that we should blame empathy for everything. There’s all sorts of other things going on here. For the Willie Horton case, certainly racism played a huge role. I think even if empathy was stripped from our heads, powerful stories will always move us but the argument I make in my book is empathy is so vulnerable to these biases. Empathy always searches for the one. 

It always zooms us in on the one person. It ignores the many, it ignores hypotheticals, it ignores statistics and so it misguides us over what’s important or what matters and it leads to lousy policy and this brings us back to our earlier discussions of definitions of empathy, which is the solution isn’t that we should become cold blooded monsters. The solution is that we should still feel for people, feel real kindness and concern and compassion for people, but we should try to rid ourselves of the habit that we have of zooming in on individuals. 

And so towards the end of my book, I discuss the distinction between empathy and compassion, between feeling the pain of others — empathy — versus just wanting to help them — compassion. I even talk about some fascinating work on meditation and meditative practices which both illustrate the distinction. They get people to do empathy training, they get people to do compassion training, they find all sorts of differences. 

But also, they showed it as possible to make yourself somewhat less empathic but also kinder, which I think would be an indispensable skill for all of us. But particularly people like doctors and nurses and first responders and police and firefighters, people who deal with emotional and difficult situations. The best of them can shut down empathic responses while still caring for other people. 

[0:29:38.2] MB: I’d love to dig into that a little bit more, the distinction between empathy and compassion and we’ve actually had a previous episode where we went deep on the concept of compassion and distinguished it from empathy. In that episode, we touched a little bit on the idea of the main negative thing about empathy, was the idea of empathy burnout and how you can become overwhelmed with trying to bear the cross of feel the emotions of the suffering of others and if you instead focus on how to help them, you can be more proactive. But I would love to hear a little bit more about your take on the distinction between those two things. 

[0:30:11.9] PB: So my take is exactly that take where I got into it actually by reading a bit of Buddhist philosophy. There’s a lot of Buddhist philosophy which asks the question of, “How are you to be a good person,” and how a Buddhist philosopher’s distinguish between what they call sentimental compassion and great compassion and sentimental compassion is what we’ve been talking about as empathy. It’s feeling other people’s pain and feeling other people’s suffering. 

The Buddhist scholars say, “Don’t do this. It might give you a short term buzz but in the long run, it’s bad for you. It will burn you out, it will exhaust you”. People, the term burnout I think is from the 70’s but hundreds of years ago people worry about this. So the alternative is great compassion, which I’m just calling compassion, which is caring about people, loving them but not feeling their pain and the cool thing is that this great compassion seems to be pleasant, invigorating, energizing. 

It makes you a better person but it also makes you a happier person and so a lot of contemporary meditative practice uses — it’s called loving kindness meditation. It uses these techniques to motivate people to be better people and one argument is that they work so well because the meditative practice dampens your empathic responses and a lot of what I’ve been talking about now is theology and philosophy and so on but there’s real evidence for this. 

There’s some wonderful work done by the neuroscientist, Tanya Singer in collaboration with the biologist and Buddhist monk, Mathew Ricard, where they put people in scanners and they have them meditate in different ways, exercised their empathy or exercised their compassion and they find all sorts of different responses and what they find is inevitably you were just much better feeling compassionate. 

[0:31:56.2] MB: I’m curious, you touched on earlier and I’m starting to think about how can somebody listening start to implement this in their lives? What is a concept of a warm glow altruist? 

[0:32:08.9] PB: I’m not sure where the phrase came from but it was discussed by the philosopher Peter Singer where he talks about how some people give to charity and he says, some people give to charity, what they do is they have some money and they spread it around to all different charities.” They give a little bit to Ox fam and a bit to Save the Whales and a bit to their local arts community and a bit to their high school football team and they won’t give that much anytime. 

They spread it around and this is either consciously or unconsciously, a wonderful tactic to feel good about yourself. Each of the different charities you give, you had a little dopamine blast of feel good. But Singer points out, if you want to feel good you’ve come across a great technique. If you want to make the world a better place, if you really want to help people, do it differently. If you really want to help people, figure out where your money and your resources could do the most good and put them there. 

Ignore pictures of adorable babies, but what you should do is go online and see what people say with these charity. Does the charity tests it outcomes? Is it effective? Try to figure out how to make the world a better place and this applies even beyond money. I have a friend of mine who is a wealthy Yale professor and she would go work in a homeless shelter and there’s nothing wrong with that. That makes the world a better place but the problem was she was doing this instead of giving money. 

And the truth is with her salary she could have given a lot more money to do a lot more good than her time at the homeless shelter, which could have done by anybody and that sounds, I know I’ve talked to people, that sounds really cold. It sounds cold and unromantic and what about the warm feelings of connection and so on? And my response is it depends on what you want. If you want to feel good about yourself like a special person, a real helper, get a real connection and make yourself a man of the people and all that stuff, well there’s all sorts of things you do. Be a warm glow giver. 

But if you want to really help people, do something different. So it depends on your goals. My feeling is and I am an endless optimist about human nature is that most people really care about other people who want to make the world a better place and if you remind them, if you prompt them. If you get them to recognize that their emotional pulls are a poor guide to their behavior, they will work hard in doing better. I know I have.

[0:34:35.3] MB: And I think that that to me was the crux of this argument and helped me really understand it, which is what you just said, that your emotional pulls often mislead you and that if we zoom out from the spotlight of getting really caught up and the emotions and the vividness and the story, we can make what are objectively more rational, more statistically relevant and important interventions as opposed to getting caught up in this emotional whirlwind. 

[0:35:10.7] PB: That’s a perfect summary of my argument and you know some people could be skeptical. You asked about responses to my ideas and one response I often get is, “Well maybe you’re right but what are we going to do about it? We’re always going to captured by our emotions and our gut feelings.” 

But again, I’m more optimistic and I give an analogy to racism which is we’re naturally racists. There’s a thousand studies showing we’re biased to favor our own. Even in cases where we really don’t want to and don’t think we are, but does that mean we have to throw up our hands and say we’re stuck with it? Not at all. 

There’s all sorts of ways we can circumvent and avoid our racism. We can engage in practices that diminish it. We could set up technical means within our society like blind reviewing or quota systems that — and they are very different ideas what they share is they take the decision out of our hands. They avoid our biases. If you want to be a good person, you should be aware of your biases, both your moral biases but also your rational biases and so on and then think hard about how to override them. 

[0:36:17.4] MB: I think that’s a great point as well which is that in order to move beyond these biases, we first have to cultivate an awareness of them and in many ways, the dialogue around this can often cut off the conversation before we really get to the point of acknowledging and accepting that biases do exists. 

[0:36:39.4] PB: That’s right. So to some extent I think the great contribution of psychology to modern times has been making us aware of our biases and limitations. Where some psychologist go wrong, I think, is that they jump to the conclusion that we are nothing more than our biases and limitations and I think instead there’s a duality that we’ve been talking about. We are biased, we are limited, we are swayed by irrational things but we’re also smart enough to know it. 

We can use our intelligence and our self-control and our desire to make a real difference to try to override the more emotional parts of ourselves and we’re just talking here about making decisions, making moral decisions and moral actions. I have nothing against empathy in general. Empathy is a wonderful source of pleasure, of intimacy, it’s part of sex, it’s part of sports, it’s part of reading a novel or watching a movie. It’s just as a moral guide, it’s a sort of thing that we should really distrust. 

[0:37:38.9] MB: You know for a man who is against empathy, I think you have a very uplifting view of the direction of the human future and I think that’s a great way to think about it in the sense of, I think you are totally right that many psychologists think that we get almost too far to the other extreme in saying, “We can’t overcome any of these biases.” But I really like your uplifting perspective that we have to be aware and know that these biases are real but we also have the logic and the reason and the ability to move beyond them and build a better future. 

[0:38:13.0] PB: Yeah, I mean you could see it. You could see the intellectual history not just of psychology but how people talk in newspapers and in blogs and online and how we think about ourselves where there was a time of enlightenment where we thought of ourselves as perfectly rational beings, for the most part, the age of reason. 

And then it swung and where we are now is basically many of my colleagues will say, “People are idiots. We’re just incredibly limited, we’re just so foolish in so many ways,” and one of the many goals in my book is to try to push that pendulum back a bit to acknowledge all of these limitations but also to have this optimistic view that puts a lot of focus on our reason. 

After all, we wouldn’t be having this conversation about our biases. We wouldn’t know there were biases unless we had this other more powerful, more rationale capacity. 

[0:39:07.6] MB: So for somebody who is listening and wants to concretely implement the concepts we’ve been talking about in their lives, what’s one simple piece of homework that you would give them as a starting place? 

[0:39:21.2] PB: Well one thing, which we touched upon a few times here is meditative practice, which is something that I am working on myself. But I think there is a more general answer, which is — and this is an answer regarding all of our biases, which is when you are very calm and not caught up in anything look at your life and look at your decisions and try to contemplate the extent to which you’re being held swayed by irrational biases. 

And then if you think you are, if you think for instance that some of your actions are short sighted or too empathic or racist or something like that and you don’t like it, you could work to combat it and you could work to combat it in clever ways. I have a friend of mine he gives the simplest example; he wants to give to charity but he knows that when it comes when he’s asked to give to charity he says, “Well I have other personal ways I could use the money. I could go out for a drink or whatever.” 

He feels bad about this. He doesn’t feel that this is the right way to live but he can’t fight it. So at one point he said, “Look here’s what I should do” and he set up automatic deductions on his paycheck. Very easy to do so now, he could still change his mind. He could shut it down but now he doesn’t have to decide whether to help, he doesn’t decide whether not to help. He changed what the baseline is. 

It’s sort of the moral equivalent if you’re on a diet of not keeping giant bags of M&M’s in your house. The moral equivalent if you’re trying to give up smoking, don’t go to a bar where everybody is smoking. We could be smart enough to recognize, “I am going to fall into this trap,” but to then think and plan ahead so that the trap could be circumvented and that in very general terms is, I think, how we can help defeat those aspects of ourselves that we believe should be defeated. 

[0:41:12.2] MB: For listeners who want to learn more, where can people find you and your books online? 

[0:41:17.9] PB: I have an academic website, which you could find by just typing in Paul Bloom Yale. But I’m mostly on Twitter these days. I’m just one word paulbloom@yale and I endlessly tweet about these issues, about academic gossip, about politics and some excellent bad jokes. So that’s where I recommend people to go to. 

[0:41:37.9] MB: Well Paul, thank you so much for sharing this insights. This has been a fascinating conversation and I think on the surface, it seems very controversial to be opposed to empathy. But I think peeling back the hood a little bit there’s a lot of merit to this framework and your understanding of reality and I think the acknowledgement that we have biases but also the rational optimism that we can work through them and build a better future is something that’s really inspiring. So thank you so much for being on the show and for sharing this wisdom. 

[0:42:09.3] PB: Thank you so much for having me on. This has been a wonderful conversation. 

[0:42:12.8] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners, if you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@scienceofsuccess.co. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every listener email. 

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend, either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes because that helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt how do you organize and remember all these information?” Because of that, we created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. 

You can get it by texting the word “smarter”, to the number 44222 or by going to scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. If you want to get all this incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we just talked about and much more, be sure to check out our show notes at scienceofsuccess.co. Just hit the show notes button at the top. 

Thanks again and we’ll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success.


February 23, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion, Decision Making

Pride: Why The Deadliest Sin Could Hold the Secret to Your Success with Dr. Jessica Tracy

January 26, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss PRIDE – and why it may not be the deadly sin that it’s often cracked up to be. We dig into how the research defines pride, examine the critical distinction between self esteem and narcissism, the deep importance of being able to accept criticism, and look at the difference between strategies of dominance and strategies of prestige with Dr. Jessica Tracy. 

Jessica is a professor of psychology at the University of BC where she also directs the Emotion and Self Lab. She is the author of Take Pride: Why The Deadliest Sin Holds the Secret to Human Success. She has published over 80 journal articles, book chapters, edited volumes, and reviews, and her groundbreaking work on pride has been covered by hundreds of media outlets, including ABC’s Good Morning America, NPR’s All Things Considered, the New York Times, the Economist, and Scientific American.

  • How Jessica defines Pride in a way that may shock you

  • How pride can also be positive

  • The two different kinds of pride experiences

  • How one type of pride is linked to tons of positive outcomes (and the other has severe downsides)

  • The critical distinction between self esteem and narcissism

  • The truth about what narciststs and hubristic people feel deep down

  • We dig into research studies show about how people with narcissism deal with criticism

  • The critical importance of being able to take criticism

  • Why not being able to take criticism is a huge red flag for hubristic pride

  • We discuss Paul Eckman’s research on the universality of emotions

  • The expansive and visually apparent physical display of Pride and how you can recognize it

  • The fascinating finding from studying blind olympians and how they demonstrate pride

  • How pride can be a huge positive motivator to make you want to succeed

  • We dig into a number of specific research examples from Dr. Tracy’s research

  • How your emotions are “adaptive” and what that means

  • The adaptive benefits of pride and how it helps you achieve status

  • The critical difference between prestige and dominance

  • We discuss whether a strategy of dominance or a strategy of prestige is more effective in creating the results you want

  • Would you rather be loved or feared? (we answer that)

  • We discuss President Donald Trump and how his strategy of dominance caught many people by surprise and serve as a fascinating real life case study of Dr. Tracy’s research

  • We discuss the concept of “self conscious emotions”, what they are, and why they are important

  • We discuss some of Dr. Tracy's research about shame

  • Why its better to be guilty than ashamed

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] Take Pride: Why the Deadliest Sin Holds the Secret to Human Success by Jessica Tracy

  • [Bio] Jessica L. Tracy, Ph.D.

  • [Website] UBC Emotion & Self Lab

  • [Book] Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance by Angela Duckworth

  • [Book] The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature by Steven Pinker

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[00:00:12.4] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee, and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study, and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performers tick, with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode, we discuss pride, why it may not be the deadly sin it’s often cracked up to be, we dig into how research defines pride, examine the critical distinction between self-esteem and narcissism, the deep importance of being able to accept criticism, and look at the difference between strategies of dominance and strategies of prestige with Dr. Jessica Tracy.

The Science of Success continues to grow, with more than 725,000 downloads, listeners in over a hundred countries, hitting number one New and Noteworthy, and more. I get listener comments and emails all the time asking me, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all this incredible information?” 

A lot of our listeners are curious about how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge you get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to podcast and more. Because of that, we created an epic resource just for you. A detailed guide called “How to Organize and Remember Everything.” You can get it completely free by texting the world “smarter” to the number 44222. Again, it’s a guide we created called “How to Organize and Remember Everything.” All you have to do to get it is to text the word “smarter” to the number 44222, or go to scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email.

In our previous episode, we discussed what Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking, and others consider to be the single greatest threat to humanity, why death is not a binary event that makes you transition from being alive or dead at a specific moment in time, we asked if you would spend a thousand dollars on a chance to live forever, we looked at the biology behind cryogenics, vitrification, and putting your body on biological pause, and explored why poverty, climate change, war, and all of our problems melt away in the face of one extremely important issue with our guest Tim Urban from Wait but Why. If you love exploring relevant, highly fascinating scientific topics, listen to that episode. 

[0:02:25.0] MB: Today, we have another fascinating guest on the show, Dr. Jessica Tracy. Jessica is a professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia, where she also directs the Emotion and Self lab. She’s the author of Take Pride: Why the Deadliest Sin Holds the Secret to Human Success, she’s published over 80 journal articles, book chapters, edited volumes and reviews, and her ground-breaking work on Pride has been covered in hundreds of media outlets, including Good Morning America, NPR, New York Times, The Economist, and The Scientific American.

Jess, welcome to the Science of Success.

[0:02:56.7] JT: Thank you so much, thanks for having me.

[0:02:57.7] MB: Well, we’re very excited to have you on here. For listeners who might not be familiar with you and some of your work, tell us a little bit about yourself.

[0:03:04.9] JT: Sure. I’m a researcher, a psychology researcher at the University of British Columbia. I teach psychology, but mainly what I do is do research, and most of my research is on emotions. The emotions that I kind of specialize in are the emotions that we call self-conscious emotions. These are emotions that are all about how we feel about ourselves. They typically include shame, guilt and pride. Pride is the one that I’ve really done the most research on.

[0:03:28.2] MB: Very exciting. Tell me a little bit, sort of what is pride? I know a lot of people have misconceptions or maybe don’t really understand it, obviously not to the degree that you do, but when people think of pride, they might not necessarily think of what you talk about. How do you define pride?

[0:03:45.1] JT: Yeah. Pride is, in its simplest terms, it’s the emotion that we feel when we feel good about ourselves. That can mean we feel good about ourselves for having accomplished something really big and really important, or even something small but that we worked hard for, or it could be that we feel good about ourselves because we just kind of are reflecting back and feel like, “Hey, you know, I’m pretty awesome. I’m really great.”

Those are two slightly different feelings, and we can talk about that, that pride is not one kind of simple thing, it’s two different things, and it’s most straightforward sense, it’s basically these positive feelings about one’s self.

[0:04:18.0] MB: When many people think of pride, it’s a deadly sin, pride cometh before a fall, all of that kind of stuff. Is pride something that’s negative?

[0:04:26.7] JT: Yeah, this is kind of the big issue that I was sort of implying, that pride can be negative, but it’s also positive. So what we found is that there are actually two different kinds of pride experiences. This is a really big important finding, because I think the failure to distinguish between these two prides has led to all kinds of confusion in many different ways.

On the one hand, we have the kind of pride that is all about feelings of self-confidence and self-worth. It is typically found in response to a hard-earned accomplishment, when you really work for something that’s important to you, and you achieve it, and then you feel good about yourself as a result. We call that authentic pride, and that’s because it’s based on an authentic sense of self. You’re sort of reflecting on who you are, and the hard work you put in a realistic manner. 

That kind of pride is linked to all kinds of good outcomes. When you feel that kind of pride, it typically makes you want to keep on working hard. People who tend to feel it tend to be good people. They care about others, they care about their society, they want to help others, and they’re high in sort of achievement motivation. 

But there is this other kind of pride as well. That’s the kind of pride that we feel when it’s not just that we feel good about ourselves, but that we feel like we’re really great, and even better than everyone else. This is the kind of pride that like arrogance, egotism, conceitedness, and we call this kind of pride hubristic pride. The word hubris, of course, comes from the Greeks, who talk about hubris in pretty much these terms. People who had hubris, according to the Greeks, were people who basically believed they were kind of like gods more than humans. That’s a little bit what hubristic pride is. It really is this almost godlike feeling, very self grandizing. 

That kind of pride, we found, is linked to a lot of problematic outcomes. People who tend to feel it tend to be aggressive, they’re sort of manipulative of others, they take advantage of others in order to accomplish their own ends, or they’re sort of selfish and as a result, they have a number of psychological problems, they tend to succumb to depression and anxiety, they have trouble making close friends, they’re disliked by others around them. 

There’s really a big distinction, these really are two different experiences in many ways, and yet in English, we refer to them with that same word, pride.

[0:06:23.2] MB: Tell me a little bit more about the distinction between authentic pride and hubristic pride, and why haven’t people kind of grasped that distinction before?

[0:06:32.8] JT: One reason that I think people haven’t grasped it, I guess I would say is because both prides do involve positive feelings about their self. It’s not that one is pride and one is anger. They’re not two totally different emotions. They are both this good feeling about the self. I think it’s pretty easy to say well, one’s just an extreme version, right?

You feel a little bit of pride, that’s authentic pride, you feel a lot of pride, that’s hubristic pride. That’s really not what it is. I think, you know, that’s an easy mistake to make, but there really is actually more of a qualitative, not just a quantitative difference between these two kinds of pride. One way to understand it from a psychological perspective is to think about the difference between self-esteem and narcissism.

Psychologists talk about self-esteem as this really great thing. We want our kids to have high self-esteem, and lots of studies have looked at high self-esteem and shown that basically, it’s really pretty much everything good that psychologists study. If there’s a good personality trait, or good behavior, or good social behavior, it’s linked to high self-esteem.

Narcissism, which is another topic that psychologists have studied for quite a while, is linked to all kinds of bad behaviors. Narcissists tend to be aggressive, they take advantage of others, they do all the things that I was saying before characterize people who feel a lot of hubristic pride. That’s because narcissism, unlike self-esteem, isn’t a genuine good feeling about the self, it’s not based on a realistic self-appraisal, it’s based on a more exaggerated sense of self. 

That’s exactly what hubristic pride is. Hubristic pride is the emotion that fuels narcissism, and it occurs not when we’re kind of looking realistically at ourselves, and what we’ve done, and our accomplishments; but rather when we’re sort of taking this biased view of ourselves. This sort of inflated view of ourselves, where we really are motivated to see ourselves in the best possible light.

One thing I argue in my book is that the reason for this motivation is because deep down, people who are feeling hubristic pride really aren’t feeling good about themselves at all. You’ve got this kind of almost ironic process that happens, where when people, some people, feel bad about themselves, feel shame, those feelings are so painful to experience, rather than consciously accept them, they sort of burry them. They repress them, they pretend they’re not there, they try to avoid them.

One way of doing that, or one way to help do that, is to instead experience the opposite, right? You feel threatened in some way, someone maybe criticizes you, and instead of thinking god, I feel horrible about myself, you bury that. Instead, you say, “You know what? He’s an idiot. I’m the one who is great, I know everything, I’m better than everyone else. I’m going to show him,” and that’s what people who are narcissistic tend to do, and that seems to be a behavior associated with hubristic pride.

[0:08:57.2] MB: So deep down, many people who exhibit kind of narcissistic behavior, or as you call it, hubristic pride, they don’t feel good about themselves, and in many ways it’s sort of a manifestation of a lack of self-confidence and self-esteem?

[0:09:11.1] JT: Yeah, that’s exactly right. This is a fairly controversial idea. Some people who study narcissism say that’s not the case, narcissists just think they’re really great, and the reason that they get aggressive when other people challenge them is because it kind of annoys them to have other people challenge them when they know that they’re really great.

My view is that it doesn’t make a lot of sense, you know? You can sort of think about it logically. If you think you’re great and you have total confidence in that, you're not sort of underneath it all questioning that or feeling insecure about it. Someone comes along and challenges you in some way, and typically, in research studies, the way this is done is you’re asked to write a short essay about a topic that you may or may not have strong feelings about.

Spend five minutes or so on it, and you’re just doing it for some course credits. It’s really not something you’re deeply invested in anyway. You then submit the essay to who you think is another student, you get it back, and you find that the essay’s been sort of torn apart. This other student has written red marks all over it telling you how terrible they think it is.

You could imagine yourself in a situation, and again, if you’re someone who has a real genuine sense of confidence in yourself, you probably would respond to those criticisms by thinking, “Well, you know, I spent five minutes on that essay, it’s really not something I care about, this is no big deal.” Or maybe you think, “You know, I think my essay was pretty good. This guy, he doesn’t know what he’s doing. That’s fine, he can say what he thinks, and I’ll continue with my opinion.”

What the narcissist does is instead say, “That guy, I hate him.” He lashes out at that guy, and so studies show that narcissists will go to great lengths to punish the person who just gave them this negative feedback. They’ll blast them with loud noise, they’ll dose them with really spicy hot sauce. Whatever opportunity researchers essentially give them to punish these people, they’ll take it, and so my view is that we really can only explain that kind of extreme aggressive behavior in the situation by suggesting that well, underneath those feelings of confidence is really the opposite. It’s something else that the person is really desperately defending against.

[0:10:59.1] MB: That’s fascinating. You know, one of the things we’ve talked a lot about on the show is kind of the idea of accepting criticism, and being really open about feedback, and kind of understanding your own limitations. It seems like something that people who struggle with hubristic pride really can’t do is accept criticism.

[0:11:16.9] JT: Yeah, you’re absolutely right. That’s a huge limitation, and I think it’s one of the big findings about narcissism in general. It seems to be the case for hubristic pride that criticism is a real weak point, that it’s not acceptable to be attacked. These people can’t handle it.

I think that’s actually one reason to think about the distinction between authentic and hubristic pride, because if you can focus on authentic pride, your genuine accomplishments, the things you worked hard for, and have a realistic sense of self-confidence when based on what you actually did, rather than this artificial self-grandized perception that’s all about defending these unconscious feelings of insecurity, then you can accept criticism. 

Then you can hear this negative feedback and say, “You know what? They’re right. I could do better,” or “They’re wrong. I think I did a really good job, and I disagree with this person,” but kind of take it either way and not get upset about it, and not get too upset about it. I think that’s a really, obviously, important thing to do for people in almost any work you meet.

[0:12:08.4] MB: I’d love to hear a little bit about some of your research background, and maybe starting with looking at pride displays, and some of the research you’ve done around Olympic athletes, and going to Burkina Faso, and all of those different stories.

[0:12:21.7] JT: Sure, yeah. When I started my research on pride, it was about 2003, and at the time, really, it’s fair to say pretty much no one had studied pride. There were sort of hints of it here and there, some developmental psychologists, people who study children had looked at pride and kids, but there really wasn’t a lot in the adults. 

There’s a whole bunch of historical reasons for that, but one of the big factors is that emotion research really took off in the 1970’s and 80’s. When Paul Ekman famously traveled around the world and found that people everywhere recognize and show facial expressions and emotions in the same way. This is a really kind of ground breaking finding.

He very famously went to Papua New Guinea and studied people who were members of this small tribe, who have never seen a westerner before in their lives, and he showed them emotional expressions from the west and they identified them in the same way that westerners did. This was a big deal because it suggested emotions are universal, right?

If people all over the world identify emotion expressions in the same way, that has to mean that expressions aren’t something that each culture creates individually in its own way. Instead, it has to mean that emotions are a part of our human nature. They’re something we evolve to experience and display. That was a really kind of ground breaking finding at that time. 

That was really great, but the downside of it was that Ekman studied and found evidence for the universality for only a very small set of six emotions. These six emotions, you know, you probably can maybe guess what they are, but anger, fear, sadness, disgust, happiness, and surprise. They do seem to be universal. They have these universal facial expressions, and they’re important in many ways, and sort of have all kinds of adaptive functions for humans.

That doesn’t mean that there aren’t other emotions out there as well that might also be adaptive and important. Yet, what people took from Ekman’s research is that actually, no, only these six emotions, only these six that have these universal facial expressions. Those are really the only kind of important emotions worthy of studying, fundamental to the human species. 

When I started and got interested in pride in the early 2000’s, there really hadn’t been much done. Partly for this reason, it occurred to me that, you know, perhaps pride does have a universal nonverbal display. The thing about Ekman’s research was that it was really restricted to the face. He was very focused on finding the emotions that people show in their faces.

Pride, you can’t show it just from the face. If you look what a facial expression of pride looks like, you won’t be able to tell it from happiness. It looks essentially the same. However, when people feel pride, they do something distinctive with their nonverbal behaviors, it’s just that what they do involves their body as well as the face. You can think about this, right?

People who feel pride, yes, they smile, but they also tilt their heads upwards a little bit. They push out their chests, they pull back their shoulders, they basically make themselves expansive in various ways. Sometimes they raise their arms above their head and put their hands in fists. It’s really an expansive, very visually apparent display. We thought, “Well, you know, if we can show that display is also recognized as pride, or it’s recognized reliably by people all over the world, then that might mean that pride, much like these other six emotions, is a fundamental part of human nature.” 

To do that, we basically began by having people pose expressions that we thought mapped on to what we expected pride to look like, and we tested whether other people recognized them, and we started just in California, where I was in grad school, and then we took it to Europe, and then eventually to Burkina Faso, as you mentioned.

We traveled to this country in west Africa, we were able to do studies with the help of a collaborator there, with people who very much had almost no exposure to really any culture outside their own, certainly to anyone in the west. These were people living in what anthropologists call a small-scale traditional society, basically living off the land in much the same way as their ancestors had for really for millennia.

They lived in mud huts with no plumbing or electricity, in the rural countryside of this country that’s incredibly poor. Burkina Faso is typically ranked as the second or third poorest country in the world, as a result of which, they have really no access to anything outside of their own country. There’s no media, at the time, there was no internet in these rural villages. Sometimes in the cities you can find it, but certainly not where we were doing our research. No magazines. Really no way for these people to have somehow seen a western pride expression, right? It’s hard to tell a story about how that could have happened.

When we showed them pride expressions posed by people form the US, we found that they recognized them. You know, they recognized them, and they were able to say, “Yeah, that’s pride.” That’s really good evidence that this expression isn’t something that’s unique to American culture, but rather something that’s universal, that is part of our nature, because again, it’s hard to explain how these people on the other side of the world would recognize this expression in the same way if it were not for the fact that humans as a species recognize the emotion this way, because we evolved to do that. We evolved to recognize the pride expression.

[0:17:01.6] MB: You also studied blind Olympians, right? They demonstrated the same expression.

[0:17:06.5] JT: Yeah, the Burkina Faso study was nice because we looked at recognition, but you know, recognition’s just kind of one side of demonstrating a universal expression. You also want to know people actually show this expression when they’re feeling pride. To do that, we looked at Olympians, these were Judo athletes in the 2004 Olympic games, and we just looked, we coded their behaviors after every match in that Olympics. We did that, we actually were fortunate to have photos taken by an official Judo Federation photographer.

They were really high-quality photos, very up close to these people, this guy was right on the mat with them, and there were moment by moment shots of every behavior these people engaged in while experiencing what’s probably the most intense pride of their lives if they won their match. We simply tested whether the behaviors these people showed, in fact, mapped on to this recognizable pride expression that we found to be recognized by people all over the world.

Sure enough, it did, and we found no differences by culture, so we looked at athletes and countries all over the world, and basically, no matter what country they were from, they tended to respond to the success experience by displaying pride. Then we looked at blind athletes. We looked at the Paralympics, where you have people who were blind, including people who were congenitally blind, meaning they were born blind and they’ve never been able to see. 

The reason that’s really important is because here we have a group of people who literally could not have learned to display pride from watching others, right? They’ve literally never seen a pride expression. The athletes in countries all over the world probably had seen other people show pride. They’re professional athletes participating at the Olympic level, they’re obviously exposed to lots of cultures. For these blind athletes, that’s just not the case. 

When we looked at how this people responded to success, we saw exactly the same thing. Just like athletes from countries all over the world who had sight, the congenitally blind athletes also responded to winning an Olympic match by displaying these pride behaviors.

[0:18:48.1] MB: Humans display pride in a similar way across many different cultures. Does that vary for displays of authentic pride versus hubristic pride?

[0:18:57.6] JT: That’s a great question, and it’s something that we’ve really kind of tried to look into in a number of different ways. The short story is no. Both authentic and hubristic pride are associated with the same inaudible expressions. The expansive posture, the little bit of a smile, the arms extended out form the body. People will see that and will sometimes call it authentic pride, sometimes call it hubristic pride, and really can’t reliably distinguish between the two.

Now, if we give them a little bit extra information, if we tell them something about the person showing pride, like for example, “This guy is known to be kind of arrogant. He thinks he’s really great,” then they’ll say, “Okay, that’s hubristic pride.” With context, they can make this distinction, but without it, we fail to find any clear sort of pattern, which I think is surprising in many ways, and I don’t want to say the story’s over there. I think future studies might find the distinction, but that seems to be what we found so far.

[0:19:46.4] MB: We talked about some of the downsides of narcissism and hubristic pride. What are some of the benefits of authentic pride?

[0:19:53.2] JT: Well, authentic pride is in large part what motivates us to want to succeed. Basically, authentic pride is what we feel when we’ve worked hard for a particular success, and it is essentially our mind’s signal for telling us that we are doing the right thing. 

That is to say, we’re doing what we need to do to become the kind of person we want to be, which really means the kind of person our society wants us to be, because we all evolved to want to have this sense of self that we feel good about. Because doing so makes sure that you essentially stay included with our society, that people don’t reject us, and we gain status in our societies. Authentic pride is essentially the emotional signal that tells us we’re on track for doing that.

What that means is, authentic pride is incredibly rewarding. It’s one of the most pleasurable emotional experiences. We all really want to feel it, because it’s not just that we’re happy, it’s that we feel good about ourselves, right? We desperately want to feel good about ourselves, that’s just how we evolved to be.

As a result of that, we are very much motivated to want to attain authentic pride, and that desire is what pushes us to achieve in all kinds of ways. We had one interesting study, I think, that showed this, where we looked at undergraduate student’s responses to their performance on the exam. This is a real exam they took in their class, and we took a look at how well they did, and then we ask them to tell us how much pride they felt in response. Then we ask them a few weeks later, “Okay, are you going to study the same or differently for your next exam,” and then we looked at how well they did on that next exam.

It was interesting, because we thought, “Okay, the people who did well on that first exam, they’re going to tell us they felt a lot of authentic pride as a result, and then those pride feelings are going to motivate them to work even harder for the next exam, and they’re going to be even better.”

That wasn’t actually what we found. The people who did well, they did feel authentic pride, as we expected, but they didn’t change their work habits for the next exam. In fact, what they said is, “You know, I worked hard for the last exam, I did well, I feel good, I’m going to work the same way.” It’s sort of like, these are people who are performing at a really high level. They don’t actually need to change their behavior, and it’s probably more adaptive that they don’t change their behavior, and in fact, when they don’t, they still end up doing quite well on the next exam.

What was really neat, though, was that the people who didn’t do so well on that first exam, the students who sort of underperformed, many of those students told us they felt a lack of authentic pride in their performance. They essentially did not feel authentic pride in their performance. That lack of authentic pride, that is the absence of those feelings those people who told us about, that led them to tell us a few weeks later, “I am going to change my behaviors. I’m going to study differently for the next exam,” and those changed behaviors in turn led to an improved performance on the subsequent exam.

We were able to trace that improvement in their performance directly back to those missing feelings about authentic pride. It’s a bit of a complicated story, but the short version is, when people don’t do well, and people are missing that feeling of success and are able to recognize, “Hey, I’m not feeling that sense of confidence and self-worth that I want to,” that absence can actually directly motivate a change of behavior, which leads to improved performance.

[0:22:46.0] MB: The drive for authentic pride is what creates that motivation?

[0:22:51.0] JT: That’s exactly right. Yeah.

[0:22:52.3] MB: Earlier, you kind of briefly touched on the concept of emotions being adaptive. For somebody who is listening and doesn’t kind of understand what that means, could you contextualize that, and I think, sort of specifically within talking about pride?

[0:23:05.4] JT: Yeah, absolutely. It’s a good question in any case, because psychologists use the word “adaptive” in lots of different ways, which can be really confusing. Sometimes by adaptive people mean it’s good for you, it’s good for your mental health, and that’s actually not what I meant.

What I mean when I say adaptive is that it’s something that we as a species evolved to do or to have, because it increases our fitness. Fitness has a very specific meaning from an evolutionary perspective. It essentially just means increases your gene’s chances of replicating.

Basically, things that are adaptive are things that make it more likely that you're going to survive and reproduce, or survive long enough to reproduce. From that perspective, the reason pride is adaptive is because it helps us get status. The way that it does that, interestingly enough, varies for the two kinds of pride. This is where I think things get really interesting.

Because form a sort of a mental health perspective, authentic pride is adaptive and hubristic pride isn’t. Like I said, it can lead to all kinds of psychological dysfunctions and poor relationships. From an evolutionary perspective, both prides are adaptive, because they both help us get status, but they do it through very different pathways.

Authentic pride basically motivates us to achieve, as I just kind of explained, and as a result of that, it helps us get a kind of status that we call prestige. Prestige is essentially the kind of status that’s based on earned respect. Prestigious leaders are people who have achieved a great deal, they’re smart, they’re wise, they have various abilities that everyone else admires, and as a result of that, people look up to them and people willingly choose to defer to them, right? The group sort of thinks, “This guy knows what he’s doing. If I follow him, it’s going to be good for me, it’s going to be good for everyone. I’m going to learn a lot and everyone will benefit.” 

That’s one way of getting status. There is another way of getting status as well, and this is what we call dominance. Dominant leaders are people who don’t necessarily contribute anything of value to the group, they’re not big achievers, they’re not people who have special competencies or skills, but they’re people who have control over some resource that everyone else in the group thinks is valuable.

For example, perhaps they’re particularly wealthy, or perhaps they’re just big and strong. They wield their control over that resource in their really manipulative and aggressive way, essentially threatening and intimidating other people, and forcing them to give them the power that they feel they want.

You can think of a dominant leader, sort of the boss who threatens his employees, right? “If you don’t do what I say, I’m going to fire you.” People give that boss power, right? Employees will do whatever the boss says, they’ll defer to him, but they don’t want to. They don’t’ respect him. They’re not giving him the power because they’re willingly choosing to, they’re doing it because they feel that they have no choice at all, and we found in some studies that both dominance and prestige are effective ways of getting social influence. Both of these tactics actually work in terms of getting ahead. They’re both going to be adaptive strategies, but one, prestige, seems to be really particularly facilitated by authentic pride, whereas dominance is facilitated by hubristic pride. 

The reason for that is because hubristic pride, again, is an emotion that makes people feel like they’re better than everyone else, makes them willing to engage in aggressiveness and manipulation, basically topics that are required in order to take advantage of others, to advance their needs and desires, and basically puts people in a mental state that’s almost exactly what you would want in order to attain dominance, right? In order to sort of takeover, take control, be aggressive, and really just dominate others and force them to give you the power that you’re looking for.

[0:26:16.9] MB: The data shows that both paths can potentially be ways to achieve status and achieve what you want to achieve.

[0:26:24.3] JT: That’s right. We did a study in which we look at this, where we had undergraduates come to our lab and work together to complete a task, and they basically had to work together for about 20 minutes on this task. We did this because it’s sort of an ideal way to allow hierarchies to naturally form. Whenever you get a small group of humans together and don’t assign a leader, leaders kind of naturally emerge, right? Someone just takes charge, other people fall in line.

It’s just sort of how it works in our species. We wanted to know, well, how does this happen? What determines who gets control over the group? They did the task, and then afterwards we had everyone in the group rate everyone else in terms of how dominant and prestigious they were, how much they looked up to each person, and how much they were basically afraid of each person, and also how influential everyone was. Who really had influence over the group, and we also measured how influential everyone was by having outside observers watch videos that we had taken.

We recorded these interactions on video, had outside observers watch the videos, and then they told us who they thought the most influential people in the group were. That’s a useful way of kind of getting beyond just people in the group who now have come to know these people and have relationships. They’re going to be a little bit biased, and then actual influence in terms of the task itself. Who actually determined how the task played out? Who made the decisions about what the group was going to do for the task?

What we found was that the people in the group who were rated by their peers in that group as highly dominant were just as likely to get influence over the group as were the people who were rated by their peers as highly prestigious. In fact, there was actually no difference in terms of how effective dominance was as a strategy compared to prestige. Both were equally effective in terms of being rated as highly influential by your peers, being rated as highly influential by outside observers, and in terms of actually getting influence in terms of determining the outcomes on that task. 

That suggests that even though, you know, people — dominant leaders, those people, we don’t like them. That’s what we found, in fact. The people who worked in these groups who told us they did not like the people who are dominant, they actually said they were afraid of them, but it’s still an effective way of getting power, right? Even though we don’t like these people, we give them power because we’re sort of afraid not to.

[0:28:21.6] MB: Despite the fact that they didn’t like the dominant leaders, they still followed them, listened to them and did what they want.

[0:28:29.0] JT: That’s exactly right, yeah.

[0:28:29.9] MB: It kind of makes me think of the old saying, you know, would you rather be loved or feared? It seems like the research demonstrates either one might work.

[0:28:37.5] JT: Yeah. Unfortunately, right. It sort of turns out either one might work. Now, that said, if you think about it that way, well, either one works, but one gets you power and love. People really like prestigious people. They respect them. They look up to them, and they also give them power.

The other gets you power, but tremendous hate. If you have the choice, you know, there’s sort of no reason to go for dominance over prestige if you have the option, right? If you can contribute something of value to the group, if you can be a nice person, if you can be helpful to others and still get power that way, that’s the better way to go. Simply because, you know, it’s not fun to be disliked. There’s all kinds of negative psychological consequences that I mentioned before.

The hubristic pride, and that comes with dominance as well. The thing about dominance is because they’re not liked, their staying power is going to be fairly limited. People will follow them and do what they say as long as they feel threatened or intimidated by them. As soon as they don’t, when a dominant loses his power for one reason or another. Perhaps, as it comes into question, or you can think of, you know, chimpanzees, the alpha male is no longer as strong as he once was, when that happens, that person’s going to lose all power.

In fact, perhaps even be exiled from the group, right? You see coalitions can form to overtake a dominant leader, because no one likes this person and everyone wants to get rid of him. In contrast, if you’re prestigious leader, even if for some reason you no longer have your power for whatever reason, perhaps you’re not as wise as you once were, your skills deteriorate, people will still find a place in the society for you because you retain your love, right? People really like you, and so they won’t kick you out of the group, even if you’re not as powerful as you once were.

[0:30:06.0] MB: Doesn’t some of the research show that dominance in some context was actually more effective than prestige? 

[0:30:13.2] JT: Yes, so that’s this other study that we did more recently. So what we did there is we had groups work together again, and we assigned a leader in each case. We just randomly said one person in the group is going to be the leader, and we had them complete a bunch of different tasks together, and then afterwards, we looked at how well they did in all the tasks and we had everyone rate their leader on dominance and prestige again.

Our question was, “Who’s going to do better on this task, the groups that are led by someone who happens to be really high in prestige, or the groups that are led by someone who happens to be really high in dominance?” and we thought the prestigious leader was going to win the day. Everyone liked that experience better, they enjoyed it, and they would do better on the task, and that’s not what happened. 

The groups led by a prestigious leader did do better on one particular kind of task. It was a task that required creative, out of the box thinking. So it’s called the brick test. Basically, people have to come up with as many creative uses for a brick as they can. It really is this exercise in spit-balling, feeling open, being comfortable with yourself and with your group, and it’s a fun exercise, and so a prestigious leader is actually very good at getting people to generate a lot of really creative answers in the brick test. 

But the other three tasks that we gave them, which required more analytical thinking, reaching one right answer on a complicated logical test, for all of those tasks, groups actually did better if they were led by someone who is high in dominance. That really surprised us, and I think it’s very — potentially has really important implications in driving these corporations and what kind of leader we want for different tasks. 

However, one caveat that I think is important to bear in mind, is because we randomly designed the leader in these cases, we the researchers said, “You’re going to be the leader,” that’s a situation where someone whose natural disposition is prone to prestige might not feel comfortable taking charge in the way that’s often necessary to reach a clear decision. 

There’s a time when you can try for consensus for a long time, but eventually someone’s going to have to make the call and come to the conclusion. When you put someone who is high in prestige in charge, they might not feel comfortable doing that, and I don’t know that’s the case in the real world, when leaders who are high in prestige know that they are at that position because they deserve it, because they earned it, right? They worked hard to get there, and in those cases, it’s possible that people would be more willing to say, “Okay, I tried for consensus, but now it’s time and I’m going to make the call.” 

Which I think is what dominant leaders were doing in our study, because people who are prone to that kind of personality, I think, don’t have a problem doing that. Who cares about if I deserve being here? I’m the leader, I’m going to make the decision. 

[0:32:28.9] MB: So without delving into the actual politics of it, a strategy of dominance that’s caught many people by surprise, and someone you’ve talked about in the past, is Donald Trump. I’d love to hear your thoughts about that. 

[0:32:40.1] JT: Yeah. Well, Trump is a great example of someone who has an extreme amount of hubristic pride. I used him in the book as an example of this, because he really just, throughout his life and his career, has had no problem being so explicit about how great he thinks he is. That’s fairly unusual to see that level of hubristic pride, and typically, even people who have a lot of hubristic pride often know there’s ways in which they’re supposed to cut it down, or show humility, or tame it back, basically, and Donald Trump has almost never done that. 

So he’s a really nice example of that, and it’s been purely interesting to watch him in politics in the past couple of years, because he really has used the dominant strategy to get ahead, and what I mean by that is he wields his power in this incredibly aggressive manner. He attacks extremely vehemently anyone who criticizes him. So the studies I was talking about before, where people who are hubristic blast noise when they are criticized, that’s like Trump on Twitter. 

If anyone criticizes him, he lashes out, and just incredibly angrily, and it’s been really effective. People are afraid to attack him. So I think the large reason why he won the primary election is because he attacked all of the other candidates so harshly that many of them backed down, and more importantly, republican activists who wanted to criticize him and perhaps support someone else couldn’t, because the repetitional costs were too strong. 

He was attacking these people to the point where their reputations were being destroyed through social media, and they had to no choice but to back down to protect themselves, and so this is really how dominance works. People are afraid to take on a dominant leader. In the case of Trump, I think it’s because he’s very effective at using aggression and at the same time, gaining the support of a lot of people who see him as the tough guy who’s going to be on their side. 

And then other politicians have really been afraid of angering those people, of angering his mob of supporters, who see him as the guy who’s going to fight for them, and so then he created this situation where there’s really no way for these people to take on Trump without risking angering the people whose support they feel they need. 

[0:34:33.8] MB: It’s a fascinating and relevant real-life case study in some of the topics we’re talking about. Changing directions completely, at the beginning of the interview you touched on the concept of self-conscious emotions. I’d love to learn a little bit more about that and what those entail. 

[0:34:49.6] JT: Sure, so self-conscious emotions are a special category of emotions that we experience as humans, and we don’t think any other animal experiences. There’s evidence that other animals have dominance and submission, and certainly that’s a precursor of pride and shame, that’s probably evolutionary origins of pride and shame. The lion, dominance and submission, we’ve seen it in other primates, but we humans are the only ones who really experience these self-conscious emotions, because we are the only ones who have a fully complex sense of self. 

So humans are the species that basically can think about who we are, can hold that in our minds, and then evaluate it. We can think about “What kind of person do I want to be, and is who I am today, is that getting closer to the kind of closer to the person I want to be, or is it getting farther away? Do I feel good about the things I’ve done today, or do I not feel good about those things? Do I feel I need to change who I am right now?” These are really important cognitive processes, and we really do see them only in humans, and the emotions that we feel when we make these evaluations, those are the self-conscious emotions. 

[0:35:45.1] MB: And I know you haven’t researched it in nearly as much detail, but I’d be very curious to hear about some of the research you’ve done with shame, and what your thoughts are about shame. 

[0:35:54.9] JT: Yes, shame is, in many ways, the antithesis of pride, and I think it’s a really important thing. Whereas pride is motivating, both because we feel it, we want to feel it more because we like it, there are studies that show when we think about how much pride we’ll feel from doing something good, like resisting temptation, that gets us to be more likely to do that good thing. If we think about pride, we’ll resist temptation more. 

Shame is not motivating in this way. There’s very little evidence to suggest that shame actually motivates people to change their behavior for the good. There’s evidence that suggests that when people feel ashamed they want to be different, they wish they had a different self, they really don’t like themselves. Shame is this horrible negative global feeling about the self, but it’s almost demotivating, because we feel so bad about our self in such a global way, we feel powerless and hopeless, and shame typically makes people want to hide and run away from their problems and escape them rather than try to approach then and do better. 

So we actually have one study where we looked at recovering alcoholics. These are people who are newly sober, trying to sober up, and they came to our lab and we had them talk about the last time that they had a drink. We had them do this while they were on video, and so this is a really intense shame moment for these people. This is often defined when they’d bottom out, the moment that led to them to seek sobriety, and then we say goodbye to them, and then we have them come back to our lab about four or five months later just to see how they’re doing. 

It’s really interesting, because what we find is in that the first time they come in, they talk about the last time they drank. We code their non-verbal behaviors while they’re talking about their drink for displays of shame, and displays of shame basically look like the opposite of displays of pride. Head is tilted down, posture is constricted and narrowed, they are hiding themselves away, and what we find is that the more shame these people show when talking about the last time they drank, the more likely they are to relapse when they come back four months later. 

That is to say, the more likely it is that they’ve now had a drink or several drinks, and in fact, the amount of shame they show while talking about their last drink actually predicts the number of drinks they had consumed. So essentially, how bad the relapse is. So that’s a neat evidence that suggests that if we feel shame about something about ourselves, that’s not going to help us get over that thing. It’s actually going to potentially do the reverse and make us go ahead and do more of that bad thing, and I think that’s because we sort of think, “I feel terrible about myself. This is who I am, but there’s no getting out of it, so I might as well embrace it and just be this person.” 

[0:38:10.1] MB: So how can we deal more effectively with shame?

[0:38:13.5] JT: I think the best solution to shame is to try to instead feel guilt. Lots of research suggests that guilt is the much more adaptive negative self-conscious emotion, because instead of being about the entire global self “I’m a bad person,” it’s much more focused on a specific bad thing that happened. So when we feel shame, we feel “I’m horrible,” but when we feel guilt, we feel “I did a bad thing. I messed up. I forgot something. I didn’t study hard for the exam,” and so there’s a solution there. 

Rather than sort of the whole self being the thing that’s incriminated, it’s just one behavior that is problematic, and so you can change that behavior. You can say, “Okay, I’m going to study harder next time. I’m going to work more on this. I’m going to change what I did,” and studies do show that, in fact, guilt is motivating. It motivates people to fix the situation, to apologize if they hurt someone, and to basically try to do better in the future. 

So that is really the best way to do it, and really the only way to do that is when something goes wrong, not to attribute it to who you are as a person globally, but rather to something more specific that you did. 

[0:39:11.3] MB: I think that’s a really important distinction, and one that — we won’t go down this rabbit hole — but ties into, in many ways, some of the things we talked about many times on the podcast, which is the idea of the fixed mindset versus the growth mindset, and the notion of you can always change yourself. A related question, how do we cultivate authentic pride? 

[0:39:31.7] JT: Well I think the best thing to do in terms of thinking about how to cultivate authentic pride is to think about the kind of person you want to be. I think this is a really interesting point that we often don’t do. We often are just living our lives day to day, getting by, everything is fine, not really thinking about whether we are becoming or doing the things that we need to do to become the kind of person that we really want to be. 

To develop the sense of self that’s most important to us, to have that need that we can feel good about, and often if we do, what we realize is we’re not, but typically, more often what happens is we just feel like something is missing in our lives. In my book, I tell the story of Dean Karnazes, who’s this ultra-marathon runner who spent most of his life in a business career, and he was doing really well. He had one success after another, he had a happy marriage, all was fine, and then the moment he turned 30, he just had this overwhelming sense that his life was not going the way that he wanted it to. 

That he wasn’t satisfied with the person that he was, and he couldn’t figure out what was wrong, but that night, he went out drinking with his friends to celebrate his birthday. His wife went home early, and this woman started flirting with him, and he realized he was close to possibly ruining his life flirting with an attractive stranger, and he just started running and running, all the way to his house in San Francisco, about 30 miles down the coast to Half Moon Bay in California. 

This is someone who used to be a runner when he was in high school, but he hadn’t run in I think 10 or 15 years at that point. So you can imagine how he felt the next day, but what he realized during this amazing run was that that’s what he wanted to be doing. That he was someone who his sense of self was based on pushing himself physically to extreme levels, and that’s really what he needed to be doing with his life, and so he made that a priority and he started by on the weekends running. 

Running nonstop, and started to do 24-hour runs, which is hard to believe, but they exist. Hundred-mile runs and eventually, he turned his whole life around and actually was able to give up his business career and parlay the running career into a profitable enterprise, and that’s not something everyone can do, but I do think figuring out who you are and what kind of person you want to be and what things you can do to best become that person, that’s really the answer to trying to achieve authentic pride. 

[0:41:33.6] MB: What’s one piece of homework that you would give to somebody who’s listening to this episode? 

[0:41:38.1] JT: Homework, that’s interesting. I guess I would say, like I said, think about if there’s something missing in your life in terms of attaining a sense of self-satisfaction. You can think about it as pride, but I think pride is tough. We often don’t like to talk about ourselves, just feeling proud of ourselves, because we get it confused with hubristic pride. So just think about satisfaction. What are you satisfied by in your life? Maybe it’s work. Maybe you’re bored at work and you’re not mastering things. 

You’re not having opportunities to master new things, or maybe work is fine, but you don’t have an opportunity to be creative in your life, and you’re someone who really craves a creative outlet. Or maybe like Dean Karnazes, you want to physically punish yourself, or physically challenge yourself, I should say, and train for a marathon. I think thinking about that kind of thing can open up new windows, new avenues to think about things that people can do to start feeling more of a sense of authentic pride in their lives. 

Again, it doesn’t have to be a career switch. It can be career switch, it can be picking up a hobby on the weekend, taking a photography class, helping out others, coaching your kid’s soccer team, there’s lots of different ways, I think, to get these feelings, but the first thing to do is to probably think about what’s missing? What am I not doing? What am I lacking in my life? 

[0:42:40.2] MB: So we touched on the top of your new book, Take Pride: Why the Deadliest Sin Holds the Secret to Human Success. I’m curious, obviously, listeners who want to dig into this topic, that’s a great place to start, but what are some other resources you’d recommend for people who want to dig in and do some more research about this? 

[0:42:56.8] JT: Well, I mean, it depends on what level the research is. The book is a good broad overview of all the work that I’ve done on pride, and that others have done, and then related topics on the things that we’ve been talking about, like sense of self, and identity, and evolutionary science. That’s one way to go, but if you want a more in-depth look, on my website all my research papers are available there. So anyone who’s interested can go to my website and check that out under publications. 

You can download papers or take a look if you want the more scientific version of that kind of stuff, and then if you are interested in this topic more broadly of how to use psychology, or finding some social and emotional psychology to achieve in various ways, I think Angela Duckworth’s new book is a great version of that. She talks about grit, and I think grit is very much related to authentic pride. So that’s a book that people might be interested in seeking out. 

For evolutionary science, more general, I always recommend Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate. It’s a bit of an older book, but it’s a fantastic book, and I think still the best book out there in terms of just generally understanding what is evolutionary psychology, how did our minds evolve and why, and it’s really a readable take on that, so I’d recommend that. 

[0:43:58.1] MB: And where can people find you and the book online? 

[0:44:00.9] JT: Sure. If you go to UBC, that’s University of British Columbia, so ubc-emotionlab.ca/take-pride, that will get you right to the book’s page, but if you just go to ubc-emotionlab.ca, you can see all of my work and the kinds of stuff that we do in my lab. 

[0:44:17.4] MB: Well Jessica, this has been a fascinating conversation. Very surprising take on what many people consider a negative attribute, so it’s been really interesting to hear about your research and some of the really cool conclusions about authentic pride and prestige. So thank you very much for being on the Science of Success. 

[0:44:35.5] JT: You’re welcome. Thanks so much for having me. 

[0:44:37.3] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners. 
If you want to reach out, share your story, or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@scienceofsuccess.co. I’d love to hear from you, and I read and respond to every listener email. 

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend, either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes. That helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. 

I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt how do you organize and remember all this information?” Because of that, we created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners called “How to Organize and Remember Everything.” You can get it by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222, or by going to scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. 

If you want to get all of this incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we just talked about and much more, be sure to check out our show notes. Just go to scienceofsuccess.co, hit the show notes button at the top, you can get everything, and we have show notes for all of our previous episodes. If you’re missing links, information, research studies, book recommendations from a previous episode or this episode, be sure to check out our show notes at scienceofsuccess.co. Thanks again, and we’ll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success.


January 26, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
58 - Artificial Intelligence, Cryogenics, & Procrastination with Wait But Why’s Tim Urban-IG2-01.jpg

Artificial Intelligence, Cryogenics, & Procrastination with Wait But Why’s Tim Urban

January 19, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss what Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking all consider the single greatest threat to humanity, why “death” is not binary event that makes you transition from being alive or dead at a specific moment in time, we ask if you would spend $1000 on a chance to live forever, we look at the biology behind cryogenics, vitrification, and putting your body on biological pause, and we explore why poverty, climate change, war, and all our problems melt away in the face of one massively important issue with our guest Tim Urban. 

Tim Urban is the creator of Wait But Why and has become one of the most popular writers on the internet with fans such as Maria Popova, Sam Harris, and Elon Musk.

His content has become so popular that according to Fast Company he has “captured a level of reader engagement that even the new-media giants would be envious of” with an average of over 1.5 million unique readers visiting and engaging on Wait But Why each month. 

We discuss:

  • Tim’s story and how he got started with Wait But Why

  • How Tim writes about everything from the human condition, to the universe, the future and huge technology trends

  • How Tim becomes a mini-expert in tons of different fields

  • How Tim overcomes massive procrastination to achieve his goals

  • The interplay between “The Rational Decision-Maker”, “The Instant Gratification Monkey” and "The Panic Monster”

  • The vital importance of "important but not urgent" activities

  • Tim’s struggle with perfectionism

  • The importance of creating accountability to overcome procrastination

  • What Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking all consider the single greatest threat to humanity

  • Why Artificial Intelligence is the single most defining issue facing humanity

  • Are you smarter than a computer?

  • The difference between “narrow” artificial intelligence, “general” artificial intelligence and artificial “superinteliigence"

  • What happens when artificial intelligence develops the ability to improve itself?

  • Why the AI revolution is inevitable and will take place within the next 20-40 years

  • Why poverty, climate change, war, and all our problems melt away in the face of artificial superinteligence

  • The battle between instant gratification and long term planning - how it relates to procrastination and AI

  • Why the notion that cryonics is the act of “freezing” “dead people”is fundamentally wrong on several levels

  • Why “death” is not binary event that instantly transitions you from being alive or dead at a specific moment in time

  • The biology behind cryogenics, vitrification, and putting your body on biological pause

  • Would you spend $1000/year for a chance to live forever?

  • “The truth is, involuntary death sucks”

  • The body is just a physical object that can be upgraded and replaced

  • And much more!

If you love exploring relevant and highly fascinating scientific topics - listen to this episode! 

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Website] Wait But Why

  • [TedTalk] Inside the Mind of a Master Procrastinator

  • [Article] The AI Revolution: The Road to Superintelligence by Tim Urban

  • [Article] Why Cryonics Makes Sense by Tim Urban

  • [Fable] The Fable of the Dragon-Tyrant by Nick Bostrom

  • [Youtube Video] Nick Bostrom's -The Fable of the Dragon Tyrant

  • [Encyclopedia of Philosophy] Pascal's Wager about God

  • [Website] Alcor Life Extension Foundation

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[00:00:12.4] MB: Welcome to the Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee, and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study, and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performers tick, with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode, we discuss what Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking, and others consider the single greatest threat to humanity, why death is not a binary event that makes you transition from being alive or dead at a specific moment in time, we ask if you could spend a thousand dollars on a chance to live forever, would you take it? We look at the biology behind cryogenics, vitrification, and putting your body on biological pause. We explore why poverty, climate change, war, and all other problems melt away in the face of this one massive issue with our guest, Tim Urban.

The Science of Success continues to grow, with more than 725,000 downloads, listeners in over a hundred countries, hitting number one New and Noteworthy, and more. A ton of our listeners are curious about how to organize and remember everything, how to keep track of all this amazing information. I get tons of listener emails asking me, “Matt, how do you organize yourself? How do you keep track of all the incredible knowledge you get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to podcasts, and more?”

Because of that, we created an amazing free resource for you, and you can get it completely free by texting the world “smarter” to the number 44222. It’s a free guide called, How to Organize and Remember Everything. Again, to get it, all you have to do is text the word “smarter” to the number 44222, or go to scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email.

In our previous episode, we discussed whether time speeds up as we get older, why your life story only makes sense looking in reverse, whether or not brain games actually work, the importance of proactive learning instead of passive learning, why psychology confirms all your worst fears about studying and getting smarter, and much more with a special two-guest interview featuring Dr. Art Markman and Dr. Bob Duke. If you want to master your mind, listen to that episode.

[0:02:33.9] MB: Today we have another incredible guest on the show, Tim Urban. Tim is the creator of one of my favorite blogs, Wait But Why. He’s become one of the most popular writers on the internet with fans including Maria Papova, Sam Harris, and Elon Musk. Tim combines long-form content, humor, and stick figures to explain the world’s most interesting concepts, including SpaceX, AI, procrastination, and we’re going to dig in to a number of these. 

His content has become so popular that, according to Fast Company, he’s captured a level of reader engagement that even new media giants would be envious of. With an average of over 1.5 million unique readers visiting and engaging on Wait But Why every month. Tim, welcome to the Science of Success.

[0:03:11.5] TU: Thanks Matt, thanks for having me.

[0:03:14.1] MB: Well, we’re very excited to have you on here. For listeners who may not be familiar with you, tell us a little bit about yourself and your story.

[0:03:21.1] TU: Yeah, I started blogging — actually, I started blogging a long time ago. I started 2005 with a blog that I was kind of doing on the side. I always kept it to something I did on the side, but I really liked it, and it was in about mid 2013 that I decided to start a new blog and go full-time, and kind of see what would happen, and you know, I always kind of wished on the other blog I could see what would happen if I could just work on a post all week.

This was a chance to do that, and I started that in 2013 and to partner, and in the last three and a half years it’s kind of basically what I’ve been doing, is full-time blogging about all different kinds of things.

[0:04:02.6] MB: What is Wait But Why, and why did you decide to start it?

[0:04:08.6] TU: Yeah, well, Wait But Why, what it has become is a long-form stick-figure illustrated blog about everything from kind of the human condition, and kind of human psychology, to the questions of the universe, and the future, and the big things going on in tech, and kind of whatever I’m interested in.

I feel like what I just said is like, a list of things that a lot of people are kind of interested in all those things, and so am I. I just kind of write about all those things. The post go really in-depth, I’ll spend sometimes over a month working on a post, sometimes they get really long, and I really kind of enjoy the liberty that I have as an independent blogger to just go in as much depth as I want without having to worry about limitations on either time or words.

That’s what it is. When I started it, I didn’t say, “I want to do a long-form blog.” I didn’t really know exactly what it was going to be. I did know I wanted to write about a lot of different kinds of things, and I did know that, you know, that I wanted to do high quality things, because so much of what I saw on the internet was clearly done for clicks, done for volume, it was put out by a site that was trying to put on a lot of stuff, and I saw where the priorities were. They weren’t on, “We want this to be the best piece that we can do.” 

That wasn’t really the focus on anything, most things I was reading online. I said that was the thing that I wanted to do different, is that I wanted to focus on not on volume, not even on consistency, but just on trying to do quality of product. That was kind of the core initial principle, and then I wanted to have fun. I didn’t want to try to figure out what I could write about that would get an audience, I wanted to make sure that if I was going to do this for a long time, I ended up doing something I really liked. I wanted to kind of — it was an outlet for my curiosity, and I wanted it to stay that way, and I wanted to kind of enjoy myself as I was doing it. That was the core idea, and it’s kind of become what it has become, and that happened as I went.

[0:06:19.1] MB: Before we dig into a couple of my favorite topics that you’ve covered on the blog, I’d love to share with our listeners a little bit about your TED Talk, and the themes of procrastination. We talk a lot about psychology and personal improvement on the show, so I’d be really curious for you to share the story of the TED Talk, and the message, and talk a little bit about procrastination.

[0:06:43.1] TU: Yeah, I always say I’m not really an expert on anything I write about, because if I wanted to be an expert on something, I would have to make that the one thing I wrote about, basically. I’d have to spend a bunch of years reading about it, and that’s not — that’s for some people but not really me. I get ADD’d about topics and want to move on after I’ve been in one for a while, and I’m curious about so many things that I want to skip around and I want to do a bunch of different things.

Which means I have become what I call a mini expert on things as I go. Procrastination is an exception, that I am an expert on being a procrastinator. That’s one thing I feel like I understand. I’m not an expert on the deep psychology of it necessarily, or that’s the work of a psychologist, but I am an expert on what it feels like to go through this problem, and to live with it, and to struggle with it, and to try a bunch of things that don’t work to fix it, and I think that made me very qualified to really write about what goes on in the head of a procrastinator.

What it feels like, and why it’s so hard, and so that started as a blogpost and ended up also being the subject of a TED Talk that I did. What I did for that is I kind of just sat back when I first wrote the post, and I just thought about what actually goes on in the literal, like, in the second, the exact second when I’m trying to do something, and I know I should be doing one thing, and then I go and actually do something else.

What is going on in that moment? I came to the conclusion that there’s two characters in my brain. There’s literally two motivations going on, and one of them, which I call the rational decision maker, is this adult, the adult in my brain, and just says, “Well, we should do this now, so that later we can do this.” The decision maker wants to have fun, like anyone else, but he just gets that there needs to be a balance. He can think long-term, he can see the big picture, and gets that if we do this now then we can do this later, if you don’t do this now then later’s going to be bad and we won’t be - very simple concept. 

Then there’s this other character, the child in my brain. The child doesn’t think long-term, lives entirely in the present moment, and I call that child the instant gratification monkey, because it really is like a remnant of our animal past. We are in the animal present, we are currently animals, and this is the very primitive part of our brain that simply wants to eat, reproduce, and conserve energy.

We need both of these characters, because we are like weird species, we are an animal that needs to keep the animal alive and keep the animal satisfied, but we’re also this weirdly rational animal that has this like, super-higher being of consciousness that has all these big long-term plans. We live in this very complex, advanced civilization that requires this rational center of our brain.

They’re living together. It’s like two very — it’s like two very shitty roommates. It’s like Ernie and Burt are like, bad roommates, it’s like that. Or, it’s like a really dysfunctional single parent household with an only child and one parent, and they don’t — I realize that in that moment, the adult will say something — and everyone’s got both characters. The thing that makes someone a procrastinator is that when they disagree, which is a lot, a non-procrastinator, the adult, is able to say, “Not now, monkey. sorry. I know you don’t want to do this, but we have to,” and the monkey relents, or gets overpowered, or just knows its place and this point doesn’t even try that hard. The procrastinator’s brain, it goes the other way. The power is not in the right place. The adult says this, the kid says, “I don’t want to do that,” and grabs the wheel and starts driving.

The adult just kind of like helplessly stands there. It’s a power balance between these two characters. So that’s the core of the post, and the core of something I’ve struggle with for a long time. You seem like a crazy person, but it’s actually just that you have this kind of like, unhealthy relationship in the two characters, where the parent isn’t able to control the kid, he’s always mad at the kid, the kid probably doesn’t like the parent very much, and I don’t know whether…

Where I’m not an expert is like, the core psychology. Like a psychologist might say, “That’s when your growth was stunted at some age in this one area, and it was stunted because your parents did XY and Z.” I don’t know that, I don’t know why my power balance is off, but I know what is happening, and it’s that my power balance there is off. 

Then the other part of the post and the talk is that I say, “So then how does any procrastinator get anything done? If the power balance is off, and anytime something hard needs to happen the monkey grabs the wheel, why isn’t that always just the problem?” And the answer is that there’s one other character in the brain, which I call the panic monster, which is a character that’s dormant most of the time and you don’t notice it, but then, when the deadline gets close, or when you’re in danger of public embarrassment or something like that, suddenly he wakes up and starts screaming. 

That’s the one thing the monkey’s scared of. The monkey’s not scared of the rational decision maker, but this child in your brain is terrified of the panic monster and will run away, and then the rational decision maker, in those moments, can kind of grab the wheel and finally, with no monkey there, can go and do your work, do whatever you need to do. A really bad procrastinator situation, the only time they get something done is panic, and the reason that’s dangerous is not just because panic isn’t fun or healthy, it’s not going to produce your best work, but something much darker than that and deeper than that, which is the panic monster only shows up in situations when there’s a deadline.

That’s fine when you’re in school, maybe, or if you have a certain job that’s very deadline heavy, but most situations in the real world, after school ends, unfortunately don’t have deadlines. So things like careers and the arts, your entrepreneurial careers, or something maybe — anything you want to — or being at work in a job with a boss, but somewhere where you want to spend some of your time on self-improvement.

Long term self-improvement, actually, you know, learning more, getting better. There’s no deadlines on those things, and the panic monster doesn’t wake up for those things, and of course, like all the stuff that makes people happy outside of work. Learning a new instrument, or going into the gym getting healthier, working on your relationship, or just yeah, taking care of your health, or cooking really good meals, getting better at something.

All these things that kind of make life rich. There’s no deadlines on those, and without the panic monster, if they’re hard, the monkey’s usually going to not let you do them, and you don’t have anyone to help you. Procrastinators, they often — people see them as people who they cram the last minute and you have a bad relationship with deadlines. Actually, the much sadder thing, and the thing that affects way more people, I think, very quietly and behind the scenes is this kind of concept of long-term procrastination. This situation where there’s no panic monster to help, and the procrastinator just kind of has this problem forever, and it just sits there and kind of eats away at them, and no one else even really knows about it often. 

It’s kind of like their own personal struggle, and they have huge regrets later, and they end up doing a lot of what you could think of as kind of — really urgent, but not important stuff, and there’s a lot of that in life. Emails, and your errands, and pick your kids up, or you have to go out to dinner with your friend, and you do that stuff, because those things have little deadlines. The urgent stuff. So often, the urgent stuff isn’t what’s important.

I mean, important stuff isn’t urgent most of the time, especially big life things. I want to change my job, that kind of thing is not ever going to be like, “I have to do that by Tuesday,” that doesn’t exist. You could skip a Tuesday and do it Wednesday, or Thursday, or never. They spend a lot of time doing that stuff, and they spend almost no time doing the important stuff that’s not urgent, which, like I said, is usually the really big things in life. The things that will end up on your gravestone. The things that you’ll be on your death bed really proud of. 

That kind of stuff is really often not urgent, and without a panic monster, the procrastinator can really kind of miss out on that stuff in life, and so that’s what like - procrastinators need to think about is like, not just “Am I bad with deadlines,” but “Is there important, but not urgent, stuff in my life that if I really look at this honestly, I’m just not doing, because I’m not good at doing stuff when there’s not external pressure.” I think a lot of people can answer that question and say yes, there is, and it’s bothering me.

[0:15:29.9] MB: As a self-proclaimed procrastinator, how do you overcome that challenge?

[0:15:34.9] TU: A lot of times I don’t. A lot of times I continue to have this be my core struggle, like yesterday, when I have been working on this one blog post for a long time now, and I’m dying to just get it going. A lot of readers are emailing me and wondering what the hell’s going on, and I’m very frustrated with my pace on this, so I think, okay. I sit down all day yesterday to work, I should just be writing, working. I’ve done so much research already, already outlined it, and what I did is this is like a monkey clever tactic. 

The rational decision making person isn’t so weak that he’s going to let the monkey sit around and watch TV all day. I don’t do that kind of procrastination usually. What I did do is I read articles that were relevant, I researched all day, even though I’ve already done plenty of research for a blog post. I’m not writing a book on this, I don’t need to do more research, and I did anyway, because my perfectionism kicked in, which is some — the monkey kind of like takes it. He can kind of use other characters in your brain, for like, you know, assistance, or uses my perfectionist guy all the time. Yeah, perfectionism kicked it, I said, “Oh, now I need to read this, oh, now there’s a hyper link in that article, we have to read that.” 

The rational decision maker is screaming, saying, “Stop it! This doesn’t matter! This is not important for the long-term goals here, reading the 65th and 66th articles here.” That’s classic. I still definitely have — I still definitely struggle. That said, I have written a lot on Wait But Why. I’ve written probably almost a hundred pretty long blogposts in three years, that’s a lot.

That’s equivalent of many books of writing. I managed to conquer some things, but I think it’s mostly the fact that at the beginning, as I said, Wait But Why was started by me and a partner, my partner is my friend and business partner who runs kind of this other business that two of us started in 2007, and he is running that for both of us while I’m writing Wait But Why and starting this kind of what could be a media platform, what could be  a brand, or could just be a cool project, but I’m starting it for both of us. 

I had kind of a couple of things. I had pressure from the fact that I was letting someone else down, not just myself, if I didn’t work on this early on. That helped, that was external pressure, and then there were readers pretty quickly. I got lucky in that situation, where the readers happened pretty quickly, quicker than I thought they would, but there was an audience and it built up pretty early on in the life of Wait But Why, which for me is huge, because suddenly, that is kind of a panic monster.

It’s not a full one, like a hard deadline. The panic monster’s volume of his scream never gets to like a full peak volume, but he is always kind of there, because you have readers and they’re going to go away. That hard-earned readership is going to give up on you. They have plenty of other options on the internet, they’ll just get up and they’ll forget about you if you don’t write.

I kind of had some external pressure, some panic monsters going on, and that’s part of why I did that, so I would say that that’s — what I did is kind of an interim step a procrastinator can take. It was really important to me to do something like Wait But Why. I’m really happy and gratified that I have done it.

I think it’s like it’s a great thing for me to have done this, but I don’t think that I did it by solving that procrastination problem, I think I did it by creating panic monsters in my life, which is kind of a Band-Aid. It’s getting you through the next step without solving the problem, and its a problem. As far as the problem, I’m still working on it really hard, and I hope to one day come back and write another post about — it’s called, “How I Beat Procrastination.” That’s going to be a fun post to write, and I’m not anywhere near ready to write that yet.

[0:19:15.5] MB: In many ways it sounds like accountability and kind of creating some external pressure is one of the effective strategies that you’ve used in the past?

[0:19:24.0] TU: Yes, it is an effective strategy, but it’s not a sustainable long-term strategy, I don’t think. It could be, it’s just not great. It’s not — the really good long term strategy will be learning how to just have the adult have the power.

When there’s something hard to do, that I don’t want to do, that the adult has to say, “Well, it’s time to do it anyway, and we’re just going to do it even though there’s no deadline, even though it’s kind of amorphous and you don’t really know how to really do it. Just get working on it, and be efficient about that,” and there’s some days I see that. It’s not like I can’t ever do it, but not as much as I would like.

I’ve done kind of, like I said, a Band-Aid solution, which is build external pressure. There’s - some people have it because they have a boss, and they have a schedule they’re on, and they have to. If you don’t, that’s really dangerous for a procrastinator, and you have to — if you haven’t solved your long-term problem, you’ll have to figure out how to build external pressure into your life so that you’re forced to make progress, because otherwise it’s going to make you really unhappy.

[0:20:35.4] MB: I’d love to change directions a little bit and get into some of the topics that you’ve covered on the blog. One of my absolute favorite posts, or I guess series of posts that you did was a two-part series about artificial intelligence.

That, I highly recommend anybody listening to go and read that, because there’s no way we could cover everything in there just in this interview, but I’d love for you to kind of share at a very high level, some of the core findings that you had when you wrote those articles, and kind of the core themes of them.

[0:21:04.6] TU: Yeah, that’s definitely one of the craziest topics I dove into. Since I have started writing I, it’s kind of when you get into that topic, every other topic kind of melts away in importance in your head, because this is like, imagine if there was a bunch of monkeys on the earth only. There’s no humans or anything, and they’re trying to do a bunch of things. They’re trying to figure out better ways to crack the coconuts, and better ways to build nests in trees, and they’re fighting with other monkey tribes.

They’re dealing with all those things, and they seem like all these dire issues. Then some monkeys are going about and they’re saying, “We’re doing something new over here, we’re building this thing called humans.” It’s also an interesting project. We know from looking at that, that’s not a normal project, that’s not one of the projects, that is a project that’s going to define every part of their existence. It’s going to define all the other projects. 

It can build humans that want to help them, the humans will easily solve all their problems. They could have a grocery store just for monkeys with every possible food they need. It’s not about cracking the coconut, now they can have any kind of food they have ever wanted - if the humans are working for them. If the humans aren’t working for them, humans could kill them all very easily without any — they could cage them, they could poison their food, they could tranquilize gun them, they could shoot them, they could taze them. They could have bombs.

There’s absolutely no match if the humans aren’t on their side, or it could be somewhere in the middle where the humans kind of ignore them, do their own thing. Sometimes the monkeys are in the way, and then the humans hurt them in order to fix that, or sometimes the humans find compassion for the monkeys and want to help. Some of them want to help and they can be a great help, but either way, building humans would be the most significant thing that the entire species of ape have ever done by far. 

That’s what we’re doing. We’re building our version of humans. We’re building something far smarter than we are, and the thing that confuses people is they say, “Well, you know, my computer’s already smarter than me. It can hold more information, it has better memory, it’s faster. My calculator can multiply 10 digit numbers way faster. Computers are already smarter,” and the answer’s no, they’re not. What they are is they’re more intelligent in a very narrow sense, in a very specific sense. Whatever the computer’s specific job is, it’s better than humans at that job, but humans have this amazing capacity for breadth. 

We have this incredible diverse intelligence that can — we have wisdom, we have social skills, we have creativity, we can learn from experience, we have reasoning, we have all this general reason. We’re smart in a way that no computer is or ever has been, not even close. There’s never been a smart computer, if you want to define it like that. You can accurately define that as general intelligence.

There’s never been a computer that had anything close to what we have, general intelligence. What computers have is narrow intelligence. We have a lot of artificial, narrow intelligence on the planet that’s really great at one thing. What humans are working on right now, and the thing the post was about, was not Siri, and Pandora, and all of this artificial narrow intelligence, it was about the concept of building AGI. Artificial General Intelligence, and what that will be like.

It’s not an easy thing to get there. I went through a bunch of different ways we’re trying to do it and the challenges on the hardware side and on the software side. Our own brain is a mystery to us, it’s extremely complex. Some people think it’s the most complex object in the known universe. Trying to replicate what it can do is not easy. We’re trying to do that, but the thing is, first of all, that alone would change everything. If there was a computer that actually could just talk to you like a person, and the computer could look at any situation and just kind of give you advice, or think about it with you and have its own ideas and plans about any part of your life.

That’s completely unheard of, but the thing about it that’s really intense is that it’s not going to just — once we get there, a lot of the way that we’re trying to build this is by building computers that can improve themselves, like they can make itself smarter through — it will be good at researching AI, and coding, and changing its own architecture, its own coding to make itself smarter, that’s why a lot of people think we’re going to get to this.

What’s going to happen when it gets there, it’s going to keep making itself smarter, and it’s going to be able to do that more and more as it gets smarter. You’re going to have something that’s the intelligence of a normal human, and it will be as good as a computer scientist as kind of a normal human, other than the fact that they can work 24 hours a day, never forgets anything, and can sync up with other computers so they can have all the same information.

You know, it will be pretty good. Suddenly it gets itself to be Einstein’s level of intelligence, which we think is a huge difference from the average human, but actually, in the big scheme of things, there’s very small difference on the intelligence scale between the smartest and the dumbest human. Very small.

Now, we have a computer that’s as smart as Einstein. Now, it’s a really good computer scientist, and before you know it, it makes itself smarter than any human’s ever been, and now it starts just leaping up in intelligence, and it can be like, once we get there, whether that’s in 20 years or 40 years or 60 years, people think it’s around, that’s kind of the ballpark area where they think we can get to general intelligence. It might be a month from that point, or maybe a week, or maybe an hour when suddenly the computer that has hit general intelligence has hit something else. What we call artificial super intelligence.

Something that, if Einstein had an IQ of 200 or whatever, just say. An average person’s IQ is maybe 110 or something. We’re talking about the computer’s IQ is now at like 50,000. Unheard of. Things we don’t even understand. Just like a monkey can’t get what a human even can do. Monkey doesn’t even know that we do what we do. It can’t even get that, even if we try to explain all the things humans do.

Not only can they not do those things, it can’t really understand even that we’re doing it. It doesn’t even have that level of capacity. That’s the kind of thing we’re talking about. Now we have this thing on the planet that can use things that seem like magic to us, that are so amazing, not only can we not do it, but we literally can’t even understand what it’s doing.

If it sat down and spoke in perfect English to us and it tried to explain, it can’t. Our brains are not capable of even understanding what it’s working on. That’s such an intense concept, that again, everything else melts away. We talk about climate change, poverty, war, these things are huge problems. Nothing compared to the problem we’re going to have if super intelligence is not either on our side in the exact way we need it to be.

And, those problems are no problem at all if the AI wants to help us fix them, and it’s going to be like a monkey smashing its hand into a padlock a thousand times, when a human can just walk over and undo it. There would be no problem for an AI to fix all of our problems if it wants to, or we could very well go extinct in the next 100 years, because AI does something we don’t want. The mistake that people make is they anthropomorphize, meaning they apply human values and characteristics to something that’s not human and never will be. 

So they think, “Oh it’s going to be evil.” I don’t know if you’re watching Westworld, but they’ve got that. The AI is going to want, it’s going to feel bad about itself, it’s going to want to be the intern, that’s something that human does. But it’s much more like is a human might build a house because it wants to build a house, and it builds on top of an anthill, and it kills all the ants in the anthill by doing it. That human doesn’t hate the ants. Humans aren’t like, “Yes, now I am king of all the ants,” no. The human is just doing it’s thing, and the ants happened to be in the way. 

So the scary thing is that when the AI is that smart, it has an unbelievable amount of power. And that power, even just a bit, it could elbow the human race off the table by accident with that power. It’s like, if we’re in the way of something it wants to do, and we haven’t very specifically programmed it to value human life, then it’s an unprecedented amount of power on this planet, and we don’t know what’s going to happen with that. That’s just a huge question mark, so yeah that’s that topic. 

[0:29:19.6] MB: You know, the funny thing is it’s really interesting, because if you look at like Elon Musk and Bill Gates, all of these people who are in the forefront of technology, you hear them off in the distance being like, “Hey guys, this AI think is really big.” No one is really paying attention to it, and I’ve heard that a number of times and thought, “Okay, whatever. What are these guys really talking about?” and your series of articles really brought the life for me the massive stakes and the consequences. 

And there’s a couple of pieces of it that I’d really love to dig into. One of the things that you touched on is the idea that all these other challenges that we’re facing, all these things that seem like major risks or challenges, global warming, or climate change, poverty, economic displacement, war, there’s this binary outcome when artificial intelligence happens, right? 

And we can talk about the science, and you’ve done a ton of research and talk about the science behind this is very, very valid, that it’s not really a question of if we’re going to have artificial super intelligence. It’s inevitable at some point, and when that inevitably gets created, there’s a binary outcome. It’s either the AI solves all of our problems forever, or we get completely wiped off the planet and humanity goes extinct.

[0:30:37.1] TU: Yeah, it kind of is. It’s one notch more complicated in that even the good side is tricky. When we think it solves all of our problems, well, who is determining what our problems are? ISIS thinks it knows what problems are, and what right and wrong is. ISIS thinks solving all of our problems means killing all infidels and creating a caliphate that rules the earth, so that’s it’s idea. Even within the US, with fairly likeminded people, you have people on opposite sides of the aisle, with different ideologies, who all say, “Well I think,” so in a very broad sense, yes. 

The big problems you are talking about it can solve, but it has to be created by people who have similar values to you that successfully program the AI to have those values. To understand those values, or it’s going to be a problem, because you can imagine how many different humans and different parts of the planet with different motivations and different values are going to want to make sure the AI does what they think are the right things, so it’s very tricky. 

It’s not an easy scenario to picture where everything goes right for everybody, so there is that. But yes, it is pretty binary whether, in general, this is a force for great good, at least to someone, or this is a destructive force like nothing we’ve ever seen. A destructive force like an asteroid was to the dinosaurs. It has that kind of potential. 

What’s funny is these two topics we’ve talked about so far, procrastination and AI, they have a lot in common, and that’s what Elon, and Stephen Hawking, and Bill Gates, and a lot of these people who tried to warn us about AI, Nick Bostrom, what they say sounds a lot like the rational decision maker of humanity saying, “Hey, let’s do this slowly and carefully, or not at all maybe, since we’re thinking really long-term. We’re playing with fire here.” 

They think we’re kind of a bunch of kids playing with a bomb, and what humanity is doing I is kind of the same thing humanity does when it comes to getting ourselves in climate change trouble, which is it’s humanity being controlled by its instant gratification monkey. Climate change is a full instant gratification monkey thing. It’s species only being able to see two feet in front of its face, trying to do stuff that’s going to make it money in the next 10 years at any given point, and not worrying about the big picture, and AI says the same thing. 

If these entrepreneurs and these developers who are just working feverishly on this thing to change the world, they probably have good motivation, most of them, but it’s still slightly instant gratification motivation, where there’s some major potential long-term consequences, and it’s just not the thing that they seem to be focusing on. They’re saying, “Build, build, build, let’s do it!” 

So I feel like the same thing that makes humans problematic, this battle in our brain between the long-term thinking adult and the instant gratification, this wanting child, which from my case comes up with procrastination. For other people, it comes up in eating unhealthy, and not being faithful in a relationship, and many other ways that this battle in our brain manifests itself. I think it’s also, humanity as a whole is dealing with the same battle, and I think that AI might be the most important example of where that now is going on, and in this case for better or for worse, hopefully not for worse, the side that is trying to build is not thinking too much about the long-term stuff. 

There’s a lot more of them out there right now, and so I have my fingers crossed here thinking like, “I hope somehow these goes well, because it seems to be happening, and the people making, I am not sure they’re thinking about human extinction. They’re thinking about their particular app, and how developing a little bit better AI for that app can make them a lot richer. It can make their app a lot better and can make a bigger impact in the world.” 

And then someone else in a different part of the world was working on their software, and they’re coming up with breakthroughs and AI for their software, and together as a species we are moving collectively down this road that’s going to end up with artificial super intelligence, but we’re all doing it in an instant gratification way. So I do think that this bit is kind of a child-adult battle. It’s the story of us, and the story of our time, and the story of the future, and for better or worse. 

[0:35:11.2] MB: And AI is such an important topic. I highly recommend anybody listening that really wants to dig in on this, as we said, some of the smartest thinkers on the planet right now consider this to be one of the most important topics. Read both of the Wait But Why posts about artificial intelligence, and we will make sure to include those in the show notes so that you can take a look, but I highly recommend, everybody that I talk to that this topic comes up even remotely, I send them the articles and I say, “You need to read this immediately.” 

I’d love to pivot a little bit and talk about another topic that’s controversial, which is cryonics. You’ve written about that, or many people refer to it as cryogenics, which I think you talked about is a misnomer, but I’d love for you to share some of your thoughts and experiences around that. 

[0:35:53.2] TU: Yeah, cryonics, cryogenics is a branch of physics that deals with really cold temperatures. A branch of science. So it’s like anything that has to do with cold temperatures of metal or rock, or embryos. We call it frozen embryos, or artificial organs, a big topic. Cryonics is a specific thing that deals with - what people who don’t know what it is, they call it freezing a human after they die to try to bring them back to life later, which sounds rightly insane. 

When I would hear about that, I’d say, “Okay, that’s obviously, nutsy people. People who can’t accept death, and just are desperate, and are trying some crazy thing that obviously won’t work.” Then I learned a lot more about it, and I understood how wrong my conception of it was. I learned a lot. I spent two weeks doing nothing but reading about cryonics, and I learned that a bunch of conceptions are wrong. So first of all, people say it’s freezing dead people. 

So the first thing is the word freezing is wrong. If you freeze a human, the liquid in their bodies, which is most of our body is, turns to ice, which crystalizes, which it actually, A, it expands to 9% bigger than it’s normal volume. B, it crystalizes and the crystals themselves splash through cell membranes, and it completely irreparably damage the cells. You cannot freeze a human without killing a human permanently.

What cryonics does is it vitrifies a human. Vitrifies means, it’s the same thing we do with embryos and organs, transplanted organs, and so the concept of glass is not a solid in the normal sense. Glass does not form an organized crystalline structure when it’s in its solid state. Glass looks like a liquid, and then it’s just a jumble of atoms and molecules, and like liquid, they just aren’t moving. That’s the only difference, they’re not moving. They’re too discus, they cannot move. 

So that’s what they do to a human. Well, let me come back to that, actually, because I want to talk about the dead part first. So freezing dead people, let’s talk about the word dead, then we’ll come back to freezing. So here’s the big part about cryonics, is that the reason we get confused about why someone could ever try to bring back a dead person is that we think about the word dead as a binary thing. Someone that’s living, and then you could pinpoint the exact second that they die. 

And once they’re dead, they’re dead as anyone who’s ever been dead, and you’re either alive or dead at any given point. That’s not true. Cryonicists see death not as a moment, but as a process, and if you really look at the science, they’re the smart ones about this. They’re correct in that 50 years ago, if someone is walking down the street and they collapse and their heart is not beating and they’re not breathing, they can be declared dead. 

That’s it, nothing to do, your heart stopped beating. They’re not breathing, it’s over, and they’d be taken to the funeral home and that’s the end of it. Today, with more technology, if that same thing happens, they wouldn’t be declared dead. They’d be rushed to the hospital - someone will give them CPR, and then they’d be rushed to the hospital and use the defibrillator, and many other more advanced techniques to try to bring them back, or not even bring them back, to keep them alive because they’re not dead. 

And so when that happens, and that person ends up walking out of the hospital later that day, we don’t say, “Oh you were dead and you came back,” we say, “Thank God you didn’t die.” So what that shows is that the person 50 years ago who fell over in the street, they weren’t dead. They were hopeless. They were unable to be saved with the technology of the time. That’s a big difference. So a cryonicists says today when someone dies, when they die of cancer, when they die of a stroke, many things that we die of, they say, “That person is not dead. That person is unable to be saved with 2016 technology.” 

The hospitals today can’t save them now. If there was a hospital across the city, if someone in the hospital is dying, and there’s a hospital across the city that has a tool that can save them, but this hospital doesn’t, everyone agrees we would get an ambulance and rush them to that hospital to try to save them. What cryonics is trying to do is rush someone to a hospital in the future that can save them, because the hospitals in the future probably will be able to. 

I strongly bet that in a hundred years or 50 years, most of the things that when someone dies in a hospital today of, would not be a death sentence anymore, and so if someone is rushed into a hospital in the future, they do that by putting them on biological pause. The reason a frozen embryo can be frozen for a long time is that it’s not actually frozen. It doesn’t die in that state, because biology, officially, it’s proven many times, can sustain the concept of being vitrified. 

They cool the embryo or the organ to such a cold state that, without changing a structure, without freezing the liquid, the atoms can no longer move anywhere. Now how do they do that? Well how do you vitrify a human? You pump anti-freeze into the blood stream, so that now you can bring the temperature down well below freezing, and you still won’t get freezing of the liquid. It will just slow and slow and slow until all activity stops. There’s not any atom in the human body that can move. It’s just paused, exactly the way it was. 

With an organ, we know how to do that, and we know how to un-vitrify it and bring it back, and have the organ work in a real living thing. With an embryo, there are people walking around the earth today that at some point were frozen, were vitrified embryos. So this works. Now, it’s more complex with the human brain. We have not yet figured out how to do that. Cryonicists are very honest about that. They say, “We don’t know if this will work. We don’t know if this will ever work, and we don’t know when if it does, but we think there’s good scientific reason to believe that this is plausible, especially to the scientists of the future.” 

Who knows what the human species of the future would be able to do? Probably pretty incredible things. Our society would be unbelievable to someone in the 1800’s, so why wouldn’t the future society be just as unbelievable to us? Why wouldn’t they be able to take a vitrified brain and say, “Yeah, we do know how to un-pause this brain and have it work.” It’s not that big of a stretch. It’s not that crazy. So essentially, that’s why cryonics is. If you sign up, then it depends on how you die. If you die in an accident, you’re going to have a very hard time. No one is going to be there at that moment, and it is a battle of time there. 

So ideally, you die in a predictable way on a death bed on a hospital somewhere, and if you’re signed up for cryonics with your annual membership fee, and by the way, people think - another myth is they think it’s for rich people. Actually, most people can afford this. So I am currently now signed up for cryonics. My bill, my annual bill is about a thousand bucks a year total. That pays for my membership fee, and I get a very cheap life insurance plan that is just for the purpose of paying. It’s made out to the cryonics company, Alcor. 

So whenever I die, that money will go to pay for the final part of the payment. A thousand a year. I mean I spend a thousand a year on so much shit. I spend that on cable. I spend it on coffee, I spend it on taxis, and other things I don’t care about that aren’t important. This seems worth it. Even if people say, “What if Alcor is a scam?” I don’t think it is. My sense, after reading about it and talking to the head of Alcor, I really actually don’t think it is. It’s a non-profit run by passionate cryonicists who are all signed up themselves. 

But you know what? Yeah, maybe it’s a scam, A. B, maybe this whole thing never works, sure. For a thousand bucks a year, even if there’s a 1% chance of this working, I’ll take my chances, because the alternative is a zero percent chance, as an atheist. If you’re religious, different story here. If you believe there’s an afterlife, a different story, but for an atheist or someone who doesn’t believe strongly in an afterlife, your alternative is closing your eyes upon death and that’s the end of you forever. 

And when you sign up for cryonics, you get to have the awesomeness that a religious person doesn’t get in their life. You get to your deathbed and you say, “You’ll never know. I might wake up. I might blink right now and then wake up in a new place,” and for me, just having that whole biz is almost worth the money. It’s like I’ll give my vitrified brain to future humanity. See what you can do, and it gives me some hope that maybe you won’t feel the passage of time. 

It will be like a blink, and you’ll wake up, and you’ll be in some future year, and ideally, the idea is they bring you back. They can cure whatever it is that killed you, but also rejuvenate you, because the human body and brain is just a physical object. It’s just cells. It’s not that complicated. The species gets good enough with nanotechnology, and don’t forget, artificial intelligence can help? 

It might be very well that you wake up with a new fresh body. A young body, they rejuvenate your brain. This is not out of the realm of possibility, and that’s all I care about. Just give me a shot. For a thousand bucks a year, it gives me a shot. So that’s the idea, and the final thing I’ll say is people’s instincts, because death is this hideous thing that’s in all of our faces and Nick Bostrom, this philosopher I like, compares death to a dragon that we all just accept. Yes, every year 60 million people have to go to the dragon. 

Don’t ever question the dragon, and it’s not even that. It’s good that they go to. It’s like we ended up in a Stockholm syndrome hostage situation, where we’re convinced that this is a good thing because there’s no way we can help it, so we try to make the best. The truth is death sucks or no, death doesn’t suck. Involuntary death sucks. If someone wants to bow out at 90, cryonics isn’t going to stop that. If we can live a lot longer than 90, someone will have the option to bow out. 

Death when you’re not ready is what sucks. When you really, really wish you could still be living. When your family still needs you or whatever. No one ever thinks that’s good, when humans just die at 40, or 33 with was the average lifespan 200 years ago. I guarantee you there are all kinds of people when doctors were saying, “I think we can get humans to live up to 70 and 80 on average one day,” there were people saying, “Oh why are you such a narcissist, wanting all this life,” you know? “Isn’t death the lot of man? Just accept it.” No. 

But now, we all live up to 80 or 90, or the average lifespan is in the 70’s on the planet. No one is saying, “Oh, well we’re such narcissists for wanting to live to fight through cancer at the age of 60, so maybe I can live until 80.” Everyone thinks that’s a brave person doing that. We think, of course, it’s great to try to live until 80. As soon as cryonics and other developments allow us to live to 150, 200, 250 and again, that sounds crazy. 

But not when you can replace your organs with truly great artificial organs, or you rejuvenate your brain cells. All we are is an object. If you can fix it, then there’s no reason that that number can go way up. As soon as you can do that, you know people aren’t going to look back and say, “Oh, this is so vain to want to live this long.” They’re going to say, “Great! This is so great that we now can live this long, and it’s so sad that people used to just die all the time in their 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, before they’re ready.” 

Or they were ready because they’ve convinced themselves through some mind game that this is a good thing and that they’re ready to go, when the truth is, if they’ve could have lived longer they’d probably would have had a totally different mindset. So that’s my long story about cryonics. I just think the more you learn about it, the more you’re like, “Wait, this is a total no brainer and it’s amazing,” but before you learn about it, it sounds insane and icky and who wants to be frozen? Everything just sounds terrible about it, and a huge waste of money, and a scam, and crazy, and all of that, and then as soon as you learn about it, it seems like the only option.

[0:47:48.0] MB: You know, the funny thing, or the most interesting thing about cryonics is, as you pointed out, is other than the financial cost, there’s really no downside. If it doesn’t work, you’re in the same boat as if you’ve never done it, but if it works, it’s a massive upside for you, and so it’s almost like the golden wager.

[0:48:06.7] TU: Exactly, Pascal’s wager. Why not? Literally, the alternative is getting eaten away by bacteria underground. Does that sound awesome to you? Or being cremated, that sounds great to you? You either have a zero percent chance of something cool happening after the moment of your death bed, or you have some chance, and some cryonicist think it’s not a 1% chance. It’s a 50% chance. Another one thinks maybe it’s a 5%, but either way, yeah. 

A thousand bucks a year, I can’t think of anything I am spending a thousand bucks on currently in a year that is a better use of that money. People say, “Oh that’s a lot of money.” It’s not when you think about the things that you spend three bucks a day on, so yeah. You just start paying for it. You adjust your lifestyle to not having that thousand dollars a year, and you move on. You’re just living the same life, not thinking about that expense anymore, because it’s just built in. 

Now you have this hope, what a cool thing. That’s my full pitch to why everyone should look into this at least. By the way, the Alcor website - Alcor is like one of the two major companies that currently does this. I wouldn’t be surprised, by the way, my life insurance claim is currently made out to Alcor. I wouldn’t be surprised if I switch it over to like, in 20 years, and like Google or some company like Google has now created like the best cryonics facility in the world. I’m just going to switch then. If something that I think is more reputable comes along, I’ll switch. 

At the moment, Alcor is the most reputable. What I was going to say is, the Alcor website has a great FAQ. It’s long, thorough, well-written FAQ, clearly by scientists, which is heartening to me to say this, by very smart, reasonable people who are not salesy, they’re not trying to sell you anything other than being just trying to be upfront. It has a ton more info there. I hope that any listeners who are intrigued by this do it so that we can all hang out in 2400 together, see how cool the phones are then, and other things. There’s going to be a lot of things that are really cool in 2400, and I want to see them.

[0:50:05.8] MB: This has been such a fascinating sample of just some of the topics that you cover on Wait But Why. There’s so much more that I want to ask you about, and I wish we could dig deeper on — we may have to do another interview. There’s just so many interesting topics, but for listeners who are curious about these things.

As I said, Tim has written blog posts that are super detailed, very research minded, rooted in science about both of these topics, and we’ll include all that stuff in the show notes, as well as the Alcor website, everything else.

Tim, before you go, where can people find you and the blog online?

[0:50:37.9] TU: Yeah, everything I do is basically on waitbutwhy.com. That’s just where I put all my blog posts, everything I’m doing for the last two years basically is sitting on that site. That’s the answer. Then I would try and encourage people who like what I do to subscribe to the email list. 

Subscribing to email lists is icky, and I don’t like doing it, and I’m sure you don’t either, but this is a very unannoying one, where we just kind of send out a post when it’s done and that’s it. Only thing the email list is for. Otherwise, because posts happen so sporadically, it’s hard to remember to check the site, and it’s not like something where we let you know when it’s going to go up, so the email’s the best way to kind of just stay in touch, and I promise I won’t annoy you.

[0:51:23.9] MB: Well Tim, this has been a fascinating conversation, and topics that I’m really interested in, thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing these insights.

[0:51:32.7] TU: Yeah, thanks so much for having me, this was fun.

[0:51:34.9] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners, If you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email, my email is matt@scienceofsuccess.co 

I would love to hear from you, and I read and respond to every listener email. The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend, either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes. That helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. 

I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all this information?” Because of that, we created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. You can get it by word “smarter” to the number 44222, or by going to scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. If you want to get all this incredible info, links, transcripts, everything we talked about on this show and much more, go to our show notes page at scienceofsuccess.co, hit the show notes button at the top, you’ll get everything for this episode, and you can find information on all of our previous episodes.

Thanks again, and we’ll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success. 

January 19, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion
57 - The Hard Truth About Psychology, Learning New Skills, & Making Mistakes with Dr. Art Markman & Dr. Bob Duke-IG2-01.jpg

The Hard Truth About Psychology, Learning New Skills, & Making Mistakes with Dr. Art Markman & Dr. Bob Duke

January 12, 2017 by Lace Gilger in Best Of, Decision Making, Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss whether time speeds up as we get older, why your life story only makes sense looking in reverse, whether or not brain games actually work, the importance of proactive learning instead of passive learning, why psychology confirms all your worst fears about studying and getting smarter – and much more with a special TWO GUEST interview featuring Dr. Art Markman & Dr. Bob Duke!

Dr. Art Markman is a Professor of Psychology and Marketing at the University of Texas and Founding Director of the Program in the Human Dimensions of Organizations.

Dr. Bob Duke is a Professor and Head of Music and Human Learning at The University of Texas at Austin, He also directs the psychology of learning program at the Colburn Conservatory of Music in Los Angeles.  
Together they co-host the NPR radio show Two Guys on Your Head and recently co-authored the book Brain Briefs.

We discuss:

  • Does time speed up as you get older?

  • Why your brain pays less and less attention to things that don’t change

  • How you underestimate the power of new experiences to have a positive impact on you

  • Brains are efficient, and efficient is another word of lazy

  • Why your brain wants to keep doing what it did last time

  • How Dyson vacuums were created (and what sawmills have to do with it)

  • The importance of learning things that seem like they “don’t matter” right now

  • The downside of a linear and close-minded path of achievement

  • Why “everyone they know who is successful knows A LOT about A LOT of things” and you can’t know ahead of time what key information will make you successful

  • Why you shouldn’t edit your life story in the forward direction (and what that means)

  • Is your memory doomed to fail?

  • Why one of the worst things you can do for your memory is to worry about your memory!

  • Do brain games actually work?

  • How do you engage the mind a way that develops thinking?

  • The difference between reading and writing and how they impact your brain

  • The importance of proactive learning instead of passive learning

  • What the data says about regret and how to deal with it

  • How learning is effortful when it actually works, and why without effort, there is very little learning

  • Is it true that we only use 10% of our brains?

  • Your brain is 3% of your body weight, but uses 25% of your daily energy supply

  • Does listening to Mozart make you smarter?

  • Why we can’t get something for nothing (and why you should stop looking for “get smart quick schemes”)

  • Why psychology confirms all your worst fears about studying and getting smarter

  • How curiosity is vital to your thinking ability

  • Why its OK to get stuff wrong, as long as you repair your error

  • Why every bit of skilled performance that you see has a deep reservoir of hard work hidden behind it

  • The critical importance of perception and self awareness in growing and improving

  • Why you are worst at judging your performance when you are bad (isn’t this one true!)

  • Why “expert performers” are really good at identifying all of their flaws

  • How to cultivate self awareness of your flaws in a way thats non-threatening to you and your ego

  • Mistakes are not the problem, but denying them is

  • The critical importance of sleep

  • How sleep clears toxins out of your brain, helps you form better memories, learn more, etc

  • Think about what has brought you joy, what brings you joy, and schedule those things into your life regularly

If you want to master your mind - listen to this episode! 

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Book] Brain Briefs by Art Markman and Bob Duke PhD

  • [Podcast] Two Guys on Your Head

  • [Book] Smart Thinking by Art Markham

  • [Book] Smart Change by Art Markham

  • [Book] Mindset: The New Psychology of Success by Carol S. Dweck

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT


[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to The Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[00:00:12.4] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performance tick, with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode, we discuss whether time speeds up as we get older. Why your life story only makes sense looking in reverse. Whether or not brain games actually work. The importance of proactive learning instead of passive learning. Why psychology confirms all your worst fears about studying and getting smarter, and much more with a special two guest interview featuring Dr. Art Markman and Dr. Bob Duke.

The Science of Success continues to grow with more than 700,000 downloads, listeners in over a hundred countries, hitting number one in New Noteworthy, and more. A lot of our listeners are curious about how to organize and remember all this information. I get tons of listener emails and comments asking me how I keep track of all the incredible knowledge I get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to podcast and much more.

Because of that, we created an awesome resource for you and you can get it completely free by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222. It’s a guide we created called How to Organize and Remember Everything. Again, to get it, just text the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or go to scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email.

In our previous episode, we discuss the daily practice that works to develop self-love, how fear is often the signpost for what we most need to do next, the lessons from a 550 mile pilgrimage through Spain, how seeking too much knowledge can be often counterproductive and much more with our guest Kamal Ravikant. If you want to be inspired starting out this new year, listen to that episode.

[0:02:07.2] MB: Today, on The Science of Success, we have a special episode. Two guests at once. We have Dr. Bob Duke who is a professor and the head of music in human learning at the University of Texas in Austin. He also directs the psychology of learning program at the Colburn conservatory of music in Los Angeles. 

We also have Dr. Art Markman who is a professor of psychology and marketing at the University of Texas and the founding director of the program in the human dimensions of organizations. Together, they cohost the NPR radio show, Two Guys On Your Head and recently coauthored the book Brain Briefs. Gentlement, welcome to The Science of Success.

[0:02:39.2] AM: Thanks a lot for having us.

[0:02:40.3] MB: Well we’re very excited to have both of you guys on here. For our guests who may not be familiar, can you each kind of introduce yourselves and say hi and tell us a little bit about yourself?

[0:02:49.1] AM: Sure, I’ll go first. Yeah, I’m Art Markman, I am a professor of psychology, I study the way people think so I’m interested in reasoning and decision making and motivation and for me, in addition to writing lots of papers that get read by 30 of my closest colleagues, it occurred to me not so long ago that almost everybody I know has a mind, almost nobody knows how that mind works.

I try to spend a lot of my time, in addition to doing research, to bringing insights from the field of cognitive science outward to other people in the hope that they might use that information to live their lives differently and probably better.

[0:03:25.3] BD: I’m Bob Duke and as you said, Matt, I’m a professor of music and human learning here at the University of Texas. Throughout my career, I’ve been studying learning and memory, not only in the context of music making but in other context as well. It’s always been of interest of mine because I work with a lot of people who are preparing to be teachers, what are the mechanisms by which people develop skills for memories, refine your skills over time.

Art and I had had several informal interactions over the years before we actually got started doing the radio show and it’s been now I guess going on four years now, right Art? It’s been a wonderful collaboration that it’s been a great deal of fun to be a part of.

[0:04:03.4] MB: Well, you guys have so many fascinating topics that you’ve written about and talked about. I’d love to start out you know, the way that the book, Brain Briefs, is kind of structured, you have all this amazing questions and you kind of go into answering a bunch of them. I’d love to start out and kind of go through a few of this questions that I found really interesting and kind of get your take on it and share some of those insights with our audience. One of the first that I found really fascinating was, does time speed up as we get older?

[0:04:30.5] AM: The older you get, the more that you begin to worry about that. But since Bob’s the older one, I’ll let him share his experience on this first.

[0:04:37.6] BD: Well the short answer is, yes. Of course what we mean by that, it doesn’t actually speed up but certainly our perceptions of the passes of time change as we age and there are a couple of explanations for that that I’ll let Art tell you about. But one of the things that’s sort of interesting about that is that when you look back into your past right?

Our perceptions of what we recall, what we remember change over time for reasons that have to do not only with an aging brain but also with just the proportion of experiences that we’ve accumulated over the course of many years of a lifetime. 

[0:05:09.6] AM: Obviously one thing that makes time feel like it’s sped up is that the older you get, the more experiences you’ve already had relative to what you’re going through right now. A year of your life when you’re six years old is an enormous proportion of your life, whereas a year of your life when you say 50 is a much smaller proportion compared to what you’ve experienced. But in addition to that, as you get older, your life tends to become more routine. You tend to rely on things that you’ve done before and as a result, you don’t lay down lots of new landmarks in your life the way you do when you’re younger.

When you’re younger you have your first time on a bicycle, your first time going to school, your first time getting in a fight on a schoolyard, or whatever it is. When you get older, you tend to do the same stuff over and over again and then when you look back on it, it’s hard to separate out all of the events, which does have the happy fact that if you continue to create lots of new experiences for yourself, like say by starting to do a radio show or something like that, then you have the opportunity to slow time down a little bit.

[0:06:13.3] BD: Yeah and I think one of the things that’s embedded in what Art’s talking about is how much our brains in their efficiencies pay less and less attention to things that don’t change. One of the ways that that routine issue that Art was talking about affects what happens to our memories is that our brain recognizes that there’s no real reason to keep reforming this memory because it’s just like the memory that’s already in there. 

I think all of us have probably experienced driving to work or driving home from the office and, you know, having many things on our mind and getting home and not remembering the trip. Well, that’s an example of how our minds can be other places when things become highly routinized.

[0:06:54.2] AM: Which, by the way, isn’t a terrible thing since the last thing you’d want to do is to clutter your mind with all the details of your daily commute. But it does make the time seem a little bit shorter when you look back on it.

[0:07:04.6] MB: I find it so fascinating and I think the idea that it’s sort of a proportion of your life right? Like you said, if you’re a six year old, on year is a massive portion of your life, whereas the older you get, a year is sort of incrementally less and less of your total life experience.

[0:07:19.0] BD: Thanks for the reminder.

[0:07:23.7] MB: You know, one of the things that you said I found really fascinating is the idea of landmarks, and how our memories are formed by unique new experiences. I once heard an example of a dinner party and someone was saying, “How can you make a dinner party more memorable?” And they said, “Instead of having everybody sit in the same room and listen to the same music for four hours, change the room you’re in and change the vibe, change the music every hour.” So Instead of having kind of one memory that your brain lumps together, you suddenly have four distinct memories that feel longer even though it’s the same amount of time.

[0:07:53.3] AM: Yeah, that sort of thing is great and I think, by extension, I think people should be a little bit mindful of trying on some new experiences, trying out some new things in order to create those landmarks in your daily life so that it’s not just remembering the dinner party, it’s also remembering October.

[0:08:13.7] MB: That touches on something, this is not a question from Brain Briefs but something I know you’ve talked about, which is kind of the importance of openness to new experiences. I’d love to hear a little bit about that and why it’s so relevant.

[0:08:24.0] BD: Yeah. Well, you know, I mean. In most of our lives, this is a good thing to follow up on, what you just asked about the passage of time. Our brains make memories when there are things to pay attention to that we need to pay attention to. The more predictable our lives are from day to day, the less our brains need to pay attention because we know what’s going to happen and it pretty much happens the way we expected it to.

There’s not much to really think about or to lay down memories for. When you create new experiences for yourself, and Art mentioned this a couple of minutes ago about aging. When you create new experiences as you age, you’re creating more memories that make your life seem more full and more interesting and more engaging.

I think often, we underestimate how much new experiences actually can do for us for our mood or sense of wellbeing and everything, but we have to acknowledge the fact that many people are not so open to new experiences. They like routines and they like to know what’s coming up. In everybody’s life, the challenge is to find a balance, a personal balance for you about how much newness, how many new experiences do you want in a given span of time, and how much do you want to rely on the predictable things that you know are going to happen every day? 

I think if anybody examines our own life, I mean, certainly for me, there are routines that I have in my day that I like very much, the fact that those are routines. But having the job that I have and the job that Art has, we get to experience a lot of new things in any given week and that also makes our lives seem that much more energized and vital.

[0:09:55.1] AM: The thing is, you have to remember that, as Bob likes to say, brains are efficient and he usually follows that up by pointing out that efficient is another word for lazy, which means that brains really want to keep doing what they did last time. So one of the reasons why they’re such a strong driver to keep doing the comfortable and familiar thing is because it actually feels good in the moment to do that. 

You know it’s going to happen, you know how it works and so you settle into this routine and as a result, you’re often a little bit hesitant to engage in some new thing because it seems like an awful lot of work and so we often don’t do those things. We actually do in the book, talk a little bit about openness in the first chapter because, you know, Bob and I as he said are privileged to be in careers where we have the opportunity to do all sorts of new and interest sting things. 

Nonetheless, when our producer Rebecca Macenroy asked us, “Hey, would you guys like a show on the radio?” Which is something we had never really considered before. We sort of stared at each other at first. I think our initial reaction was, “What? That seems a lot of work.” But then our openness to experience kicked in and we thought, “Yeah, sure, why not?” We ended up doing this brand new thing that neither of us had ever envisioned for ourselves and it’s turned out to be a wonderful part of our lives.

I think that that first hesitant reaction is one we often give in to. But by not giving in to that and trying that new thing, we create all sorts of opportunities that we didn’t envision in advance.

[0:11:26.0] MB: In a previous talk that you guys have given, I think you shared an example of Dyson vacuums.

[0:11:32.1] AM: Yeah.

[0:11:32.8] MB: I’d like to hear that story.

[0:11:33.1] AM: Sure. So James Dyson, he was an interesting guy and one of the things about him that was so interesting was that he just learned a lot of stuff about a lot of stuff without regard for why it might be valuable later. One of the things he learned about was sawmills, which most of us don’t have much experience with saw mills. 

My personal experiences usually in cartoons, right? Saw blade, log, body on the log. A real sawmill has no bodies on the log in general but definitely logs in saw blades and a lot of saw dust. What he learned about them was that the way they get rid of all that sawdust is by sucking it out of the air and then using a giant contraption called an industrial cyclone to pull the sawdust out of the air. 

Now, he learned about this without any real sense of “wow, this is going to be important to me later”. Until one day he was contemplating how to make vacuum cleaners work more effectively and in particular, how to keep the bag of a vacuum from filling up and getting its pores clogged in ways that lessen its efficiency and he realized that you could take the industrial cyclone that a sawmill uses and build a small home version of it and put it into a vacuum cleaner and that that would actually change the need for a bag in a vacuum.

I think what’s most important about that is we live in an era, educationally, in which we are told what to learn in our education system and then we’re told, “Learn this stuff in particular because it’s going to be on the exam,” which leads to my least favorite question as a professor, which is when students come up to me and say, “Will this be on the exam?”

After years of struggling with that question, it occurred to me that the proper answer to students is when they say, “Will this be on the exam?” I say, “Yes but it might not be my exam,” because you never know when that piece of information you learn is going to turn out to be valuable.

[0:13:24.4] BD: That really speaks to, I think the way many people think about planning out their lives and what’s going to happen and I think there’s become an unfortunate trend in certainly achievement oriented people in American culture that the thing to do is to plan out this linear trend, “I’m going to get this degree and I’m going to do this internship and then I’m going to go to graduate school and then I’m going to get this job.”

All of those plans are built around the idea that “I know now, exactly what I’m going to need to do and need to learn and need to be able to do 10 years from now”. That is a fiction, right? Everyone we know and I do mean everyone who is really successful at what they do knows a lot, as Art said, about a lot of things that when they learn them, really, there was no indication that that would be one of the central things that would allow them to be successful.

So the questions that people think about whether they’re college students or even younger students or young adults who are just starting out in their life and thinking, well what kind of things do I need to know to be able to be successful in this thing. Well there’s certainly is a package of stuff that’s important for you to be able to function. But beyond that, the people who really excel, the people who have all the features that employers and admirers claim to want — they’re creative, they’re insightful, they’re good problem solvers — didn’t get there through a linear path of activities and learning experiences.

They got their through some circuitous path going through some things that seem to be pointless at the time, other things that didn’t seem to be particularly interesting, other things that were fascinating but maybe weren’t going to be useful and then ended up being useful. I think the openness to experience idea really is about that issue, about exploring things that you might be curious about that might be interesting to you. That might be enlightening in some way even without the guarantee that in the long run it’s going to be useful.

[0:15:17.0] AM: Just to follow up on Bob’s point for a second. One of the things that’s really important is, I think a lot of people tend to edit their life story in the forward direction. Meaning, they have this idea of what their life is going to be like and then they seek experiences that are consistent with that idea of where their life is going and they avoid experiences that don’t seem to fit the narrative that they’re creating.

The problem is that when you look at the life stories of successful people, that life story generally only makes sense when you look back on it. In the forward direction, it’s pretty chaotic. They tried all sorts of things, some of which worked out, some of which didn’t, some of which turned out to be important, some of which didn’t and in the moment, it was often very difficult to determine what the pivotal pieces of learning were, what the pivotal experiences were. Yet they were just open to trying those things, knowing that some number of us were going to turn out to be valuable in the future.

[0:16:10.8] MB: I think that’s such a powerful insight and something that I think you guys did such a good job explaining and really impacting for the listeners. In the vein of something you touched on a little bit earlier, the idea of the brains kind of efficiency or laziness, another question that you asked in the book is, “Is our memory doomed to fail?” And I’m really curious what you think about that.

[0:16:30.8] AM: Bob, do you remember when we wrote about that?

[0:16:32.3] BD: I can’t remember a thing. I don’t know. I mean, the short answer to this, this is how you turn something, little ideas into a book, you have a short answer and then you talk about it for the next six pages. But I mean, the short answer is, well, our memories are doomed to decline in terms of the retrievability of things in our memory. 

My favorite thing in art says, I see we’re both saying each other’s lines on this podcast is that you know what? By the time you reach your new 20’s, your brain starts the long and slow decline, that’s the bad news. The good news is that the decline is long and slow. Even though there are certain diseases and injuries and other kinds of things that lead to rapid declines in memory and cognitive function.

For a typical human being who is relatively healthy, that decline is so slow that it’s mostly imperceptible even though, as we get older because we’re attuned to the idea that our memories are likely to fail, we are on heightened alert to notice every instance when we can’t find our keys or I can’t remember somebody’s name or whatever happens to be when in fact, those are things that are probably have been a part of our lives for many years it’s just as we’re getting older, they seem to loom larger in our perception.

[0:17:46.4] BD: yeah, the fact is, we’ve been forgetting things our entire lives and we don’t start worrying about that forgetting until we get older because we believe that that is now a sign of an impending cognitive apocalypse and I always like to point out, I have three kids and when they were younger, they would constantly forget stuff, they’d forget to do homework, they’d forget to take out the trash, they would forget all sorts of stuff and I like to say that at no point did any one of them ever say, “Wow, I just had a senior and high school moment.”

Then you get older, you turned 50 or whatever age it turns out to be for you and you forget something and now you think well it’s over. It turns out that one of the worst things you can do for your memory as you get older is to worry about your memory. What the studies show is that older adults who are worried that their memory is getting worse perform worse on memory tests than people who are getting older and don’t worry about their memory getting worse.

You can even induce that in a study, you can induce that worry about your memory and see that effect. What this means is, relax. The fact is yeah, look, studies show that if you want to know where somebody’s cognitive peak is, that long, slow cognitive decline means that in your 20’s, you process information fastest and you remember new things the quickest. In terms of what makes you really smart, because that has to do with what you know, you’ve accumulated lots of knowledge over the course of your life. 

So the people who are actually acting most intelligently, tend to be people in their 60’s and 70’s because they have a huge base of experience and knowledge that they can draw from. Yeah, there might be a couple of things here and there that they have forgotten but that huge store of knowledge actually gives them an advantage over younger people. In many ways, younger people need to be faster because they don’t know as much.

[0:19:33.1] MB: The processing power itself kind of slows down a little bit but the benefits of the accumulated wisdom and knowledge, essentially outweigh that slowdown for a number of years?

[0:19:43.0] BD: Particularly for people who remain mentally active, right? We know very clearly that the more new things you continue to learn throughout your life and the more new things you experience, the longer the deficits in memory that begin the accrue are held at bay. They don’t become noticeable to you because the way we retrieve memories from our memory store is by ways of all of the things that each memory is connected to, right? 

So the more interconnections you have among the things in your head, the easier it is to retrieve them. If you’re experiencing new things, one of the things that that’s prompting your brain to do is to create new connections among things that may be related in ways that when you learn them 10 years ago, you didn’t really recognize that relationship and now you do.

As Art was saying, the advantage of older adults, and being one I’m happy to claim this advantage is that not only do I have a lot of stuff in my memory but that stuff is organized in a way that lets me access it in ways that are very advantageous. We talk often about why would you have people memorize a lot of things when you’ve got an encyclopedia, a map of the earth in your pocket, in your phone? You can retrieve all kinds of information from the phone. 

But the issue with that is, you can only work with so many things at a time in your so called working memory, your processing part of your memory. The more time it takes you to get the stuff, you’re going to stick in your working memory, the slower you are. If you’ve already memorized some things and you’re pulling out information that’s already in your memory, I’m sure it’s clearer how much more efficient that would be then have to start typing on a keyboard or on a phone to go and find something out.

[0:21:24.1] AM: The other thing is, the brain has so many great ways of accessing that information based on the similarity between the situation you’re in right now and stuff that you’ve learned before. Whereas if you’re trying to find that information on the computer, you have to find the right question to ask. Had Google existed in the late 1970’s when Dyson was thinking about trying to remove the bag from the vacuum, if he had been able to Google “how do you get rid of the bag in a vacuum cleaner”, he would have gotten a whole bunch of websites and probably educational videos about how to change the bag in your vacuum.

But at no point would any of those sites have said, “Oh and by the way, consider replacing that bag with an industrial cyclone.” You got to have that knowledge in your head if you’re going to do really interesting stuff.

[0:22:10.9] MB: One of the things, I’m a huge fan of Charlie Monger and we talk about him a lot on the podcast, and he talks about the idea of kind of mental models and organizing your memories and your knowledge in a kind of a coherent lattice work that this easily accessible. I think that’s such a great point.

[0:22:27.2] AM: Yeah.

[0:22:27.5] BD: Yeah.

[0:22:28.3] MB: On the ideas of sort of remaining mentally active, one of the questions that you guys touched on, it’s something I’m really curious about is do brain games work?

[0:22:37.0] AM: Shortest chapter in the book.

[0:22:40.2] BD: Well if work means, do they help you learn to play brain games? Absolutely they work. Whether they do anything beyond that, there’s not a lot of evidence that that’s the case.

[0:22:52.7] AM: It turns out that brain games tend to focus on very specific tasks and well intentioned at first, right? I think the idea was that we know for example that this concept that Bob was talking about a working memory, the amount of stuff you can hold in mind, is related to performance on all kinds of tests of intelligence and things like that.

There was a real interesting question of, if we could expand your working memory capacity, would that in fact make you smarter? But it turns out that there isn’t really a compelling way of changing the brain’s architecture in a way that increases that working memory capacity in a way that creates general intelligence.

As Bob was saying, what you learn when you play these brain games is how to play the game. But you may as well, if you’re going to practice something, you may as well practice something that you may actually encounter again later outside of the context of sitting on your phone or your computer.

[0:23:49.5] BD: Yeah. You know, for anybody who enjoys brain games just for the fun of the game, well then great. They should play whatever things they want to download. I’m an Angry Birds fan but nobody claimed that that was a brain game, right? If you think about what really engages the mind in a way that develops thinking, it’s not just responding to other things, but it’s creating new things on your own. 

People who read have a different experience than people who write because writing requires a different set of activities in your brain than reading, watching a good video, whatever it happens to be, which mostly receptive kinds of responses were. We know that brains are trying to figure out what they need to do. If you’re engaged in something where you’re receiving input from somewhere else, it really doesn’t matter what you do, this stream of input keeps coming and whatever, well then, there’s not really a lot for your brain to be engaged in.

But if you happen to generate something on your own, it engages not only the parts of your brain that have to control whatever motor activity or whatever has to do the stuff but it also requires you to draw from different parts of your memory. That might not even have been connected before because of the nature of the task you’re trying to accomplish.

I’ll let Art talk about this too, but one that springs to mind is that Art as an adult had always wanted to play the saxophone and rather than waiting until his family was surrounding him on his death bed, saying whispering, “I wished I played, I always wanted to play the saxophone.” He actually went out and learned to play the saxophone.

I’ll let him talk about that experience a little bit.

[0:25:24.5] AM: Yeah, I think that’s absolutely right, you know? As Bob points out, it’s really important to engage in activity. In fact, B.F. Skinner who is one of the grand daddies of behavior of psychology kind of gets a bad rap in modern times because there were limitations to behaviorism. But one of his fundamental insights was that in order for the brain to learn something, you don’t just expose yourself to information, you also engage in activity. 

Activity was a fundamental part of the learning process that he was working on and I think that that’s something that’s actually gotten lost a little bit. As Bob was saying, I think it is really important for us to continue to do that throughout our lives and so when I was in my mid-30’s and was thinking about stuff I would have always liked to do and I had read some research on regret, actually. The research on regret shows that if you ask a bunch of college sophomores, what they regret, it’s almost exclusively dumb stuff they did like getting drunk at a party. But if you ask older adults, people in their 70’s, 80’s and 90’s what they regret, it’s almost exclusively stuff they didn’t do.

One of the reasons that that data point is so important is because we all have a remarkable mental capacity for time travel where we can project ourselves to the end of our lives and then look back and ask, “Is there something I would regret not having done?” For me, one of those things was I had never learned to play the saxophone and so in my mid 30’s, I got up one day and said, “All right,” I went out and found a teacher and bought a saxophone and said the fairly realistic goal that in 10 years I wouldn’t suck. That’s worked out okay. I’m in Austin and I’m in a band, which almost obligatory if you live in Texas.

[0:27:03.5] MB: As a corollary to kind of thinking about brain games and by the way, actually before I say this, I love the point that you guys made about the critical importance of active learning and not just sitting there passively. Whether it’s watching YouTube or reading or whatever it might be but really, engaging your brain in the learning process.

I’m curious, writing as you guys touched on is obviously kind of one potential way to do that. But for somebody that’s maybe outside of school that’s graduated, that’s in the working world, what are some ways that we can kind of actively learn and really engage with information instead of just being passive consumers of it?

[0:27:38.0] AM: I think, if you’re in a community that’s large enough, that there are various clubs and where people who share a given interest can go and engage together in something. It doesn’t have to be necessarily an intellectual only task or even a musical task. There are many community choirs that people can sing in, if music is what you’re in to and what you’d like to do. Some people take up a new sport. They learn, if they never played handball they learn to play handball or they learn some other skill that requires some effort and one of the things that Art and I talk about a lot is that learning is effortful if it works. 

If you don’t feel like you are putting much effort into something, you’re probably not learning much as you might think you are or as much as you are intending to. I think if you are engaging in something that makes you happy like for Art playing the saxophone, well then the effort is well-spent because you feel like, “My God an hour ago I couldn’t do this and I’ve been practicing for an hour and now I can do this. That’s a pretty cool thing and it’s enjoyable because I like music and I like playing the saxophone,” and when you contrast that to a brain game as you say, “God my score an hour ago was X and my score now is X plus whatever value. Okay and what?”

[0:28:55.6] AM: “I’m going to call mom!” 

[0:28:58.9] BD: Yeah, right. 

[0:28:59.8] AM: I think that is absolutely right and the fact is that technology provides all sorts of opportunities for people to be more active in a way that they learn. So 25 years ago if you wanted to practice your writing you might keep a journal but for many people just keeping a journal or writing something that you kept to yourself wouldn’t necessarily feel that rewarding. Now you can go in the internet and have a Google blogger’s site set up in eight minutes. 

And then you can start writing and putting it out there for people to see and so there are all of these opportunities to engage with material that you think is important and interesting to write about it and while you may have the opportunity to educate or influence others with that, you are also solidifying your own knowledge by engaging with it in that active way. So I think there’s just more avenues for doing that that don’t require just sitting and playing little games. 

[0:29:54.9] MB: So changing directions a little bit, I’m curious, one of the other topics that you guys talk about is the idea that we “only use 10% of our brains”. I’d love to hear your insights on that. 

[0:30:06.4] AM: Yeah, well that is one of the great myths that’s out there and as a cognitive psychologist, probably the question I get asked most frequently in some form or another and so one of the things we wanted to do is to understand where that sentiment came from because of course the brain, we actually use all of our brain all of the time. It’s an extraordinarily energy hungry organ. It’s about 3% of the human body weight, it uses 20 to 25% of someone’s daily energy supply. And that’s really the amount of energy that’s required just to keep the lights on. 

The physiological processes that are required to keep the brain active are very expensive from an energy standpoint which is why most beings in the planet don’t have large brains relative to their body size. So where does this myth come from? And it may come from one of two places. One is that early neuroscientist when they were exploring the brain found that only a small mass of the cells in the brain are neurons. 

The ones that actively carry signals and most of them are support staff, glial cells and other things like that support what the brain is doing. And so you could argue well only about 10% of the cells in the brain are the ones that are actively engaged in the thinking process and a lot of the rest of it is cells that are working behind the scenes, but another issue has to do with brain capacity.

One of the amazing things about the human brain is that we’re continually able to learn stuff and the brain doesn’t get full. There isn’t some day at which you try to learn some new thing and your brain says, “Sorry can’t do that, can’t learn anything else,” and so a number of writers, from William James on forward, have made the point that we may very well only use a small fraction of our capacity for thinking and so that 10% number may reflect that also. 

[0:31:55.8] MB: Another question that I thought was interesting out of the book is, “Does listening to Mozart make us smarter?”

[0:32:02.8] BD: So wouldn’t that be lovely if it did? I’d be so smart, I listen to Mozart all the time. Like many things in the sciences, and Art and I talk about this in many different contexts, somebody publishes an article that is caught by the media and portrayed in a way that it’s not quite as circumspect as it should be. And then it just takes off and in 1997, I think it was this article came out almost 20 years ago now that these psychologist in California had people listen to Mozart and then take a special reasoning test, which is one dimension of IQ. And the people who listen to Mozart got higher scores than people who didn’t, it sort of became the Mozart Effect. 

Now the term “Mozart Effect” is copyrighted and people publish things that they sell for babies and all this kind of stuff and actually when you look critically at the data, there’s no evidence that listening to Mozart really does anything that doing a lot of other things would do. There was one study that I don’t think is ever published but this guy put this up online. He had people stare at a moving computer screen saver and their scores went up as much as they did listening to Mozart. So a lot of it has to do with… 

[0:33:12.7] AM: The flying coaster effect. 

[0:33:14.1] BD: Yeah, right. Exactly. So a lot of this has to do with arousal and attention and what we know basically if you’re going to stimulate somebody such that they might do perform better on some cognitive task, for people who don’t like Mozart, if you make them listen to Mozart they’re not going to perform better. They’ll probably perform worse. So what people actually are responding to are ways to heightened arousal and heightened attention. 

You would understand how that would be evolutionarily a smart thing for brains to do, right? When you’re aroused in some way, you’re a little more attentive, you’re thinking a little more faster. I mean all those things that allow us to navigate the world are in play here but like many things that sound too good to be true, this is too good to be true. 

[0:33:57.9] AM: And I want to follow up on one thing because if you juxtapose playing brain games and listening to Mozart you also get this other piece, which is a lot of times, we want to find ways of getting something for nothing, right? We all know from school that in order to get a good grade on a test, you have to read the textbook and answer some questions and study and study early off and we know that but what we keep hoping is that there’s an easier way. That if we could only put the book under the pillow or let it play while we’re asleep or listen to Mozart or play this fun video game, then that would obviate the need to do the hard work that’s required to learn stuff. 

And what I tell any student that I teach in a cognitive psychology class is that psychology confirms all of your worst fears about studying. You have to do the work and while it may, at the front end, seem unappealing to have to take that big book down and slog through it that is in fact what you have to do in order to learn stuff. You have to actually do the work and face the knowledge, there really isn’t a shortcut but man, wouldn’t it be great if there were? And that’s I think what a lot of people respond to when they see effects like that. 

[0:35:10.4] MB: And that’s something we’ve had previous psychologist on the show that have talked about the exact same phenomenon, which is that maybe instead of “get rich quick schemes” people are constantly looking for this kind of “get smart quick schemes” and the reality is the way to become smarter, the way to become a better decision maker is to just put in the work and it’s a long journey. It’s a challenging journey, but at the end of the day it’s one that’s really worthwhile. 

[0:35:31.9] BD: I think Matt what leads people to be attracted by the ideas of brain games or whatever other thing that have offers some promise of getting you smarter or more creative or whatever is that when people say this to somebody, we have to put in the work. A lot of people are asking, “What the hell does that mean? Work at what? What do I do?” and I think when you look at people who are generally adept at dealing with the circumstances that they confront in their lives, those people tend to be generally curious people, right? 

They wonder about things. They say, “Well, why is that like that and why does that thing take so much more time than this other thing does?” Or whatever happens to be that they are considering at the moment, and that kind of curiosity is enlivening in terms of your memory, in terms of your perception, in terms of your general thinking ability. Because you’re asking a lot of questions and what brains are willing to expand the effort to do is solve a problem and so by creating little problems for yourself, even just asking the question, “Well why is that?” Well now you’ve got a problem to solve and that ongoing problem solving is beneficial to your thinking overtime. 

[0:36:37.1] AM: But this actually raises another point that we talk about in the book a little bit but it seems relevant here, which is we have a very strange relationship with errors and failure. We don’t like to not know stuff. We don’t like to not know how to do stuff and if you think about our education system, one of the things that it teaches us is mistake minimization. The way you get good grades in school is by getting stuff right. Not by getting something wrong and then repairing your error, which is actually what makes you smart in the long run. 

And so this is a real problem because what it means is that a lot of people are a little bit afraid of really digging into some new thing because they don’t like that feeling of being in this nether region in which they are aware that there’s this thing they don’t know anything about but they don’t know it yet. And I think one of the things you have to do if you’re going to really broaden that base of experience and do the work you need to do to be smarter is to be willing to tolerate both the knowledge that, “Hey, here’s something I know I don’t know and I’m going to work for a long period of time to repair that gap.”

[0:37:43.1] MB: And I am a tremendous fan of Carol Dweck, and the book Mindset and the whole distinction between the fixed and the growth mindset, I think it’s so important to accept and embrace your mistakes and to try to move your ego out of the way whenever you’re thinking about your own mistakes. 

[0:37:57.7] BD: I absolutely agree with you, Matt. I’m also a Carol Dweck fan but the thing is schools don’t make that easy, right? Because I know of very few instances where not getting things right provides you with opportunities to correct what you’ve done and actually get credit for the correction, you know what I mean? Usually what schools cultivate, as Art was saying a minute ago, is get it right when you get asked or when the paper comes due or whatever happens to be. 

I think Art and I have the privilege of working at a major research university and so we get paid our exorbitant salaries to be confused most of the time. I mean we are trying to solve problems that no one has solved before and answer questions that nobody has answered before and it’s confusing and we get a lot of stuff wrong. But without the opportunity to try and fail and then retry and maybe retry many times after that, it’s impossible to make any intellectual progress.

[0:38:51.8] AM: Carol Dweck is great. Carol and I were colleagues together for a while at Columbia before she went off to Stanford and I came down here to Texas and I completely agree that that mindset of being willing to try things that may fail is so important, particularly because when we evaluate the skilled performance of other people, we discount all of the work that they’ve done. So when people hear your podcast or when they read a book that they really enjoy, they are seeing a final product of something. 

They are not seeing all of the work that went into creating that. They are not seeing all of the attempts that didn’t go as well. They’re not reading the first drafts of the pros. Bob has the privilege, the way we wrote this book in general is I like to fill blank pages, Bob likes to edit and so it was a match made in heaven. One of the things that that means is that Bob got to read a tremendous amount of half-baked pros that ultimately became what came out in the book but nobody else gets to see that and I think that it’s important for people to realize that almost every bit of skilled performance that you see required a tremendous amount of work and effort and revision and practice to get there and then that is the critical insight underlying the mindset work that Carol Dweck works on. 

[0:40:14.9] MB: So I’d love to segue into something that you talked about in the very beginning Bob that relates to this, which is that you said your expertise is helping people develop skills and thinking about how they form memories and how they refine their skills overtime. I’d love to dig into that a little bit and some of the major lessons you’ve learned about how we can become more skilled, how we can really focus in on refining our skills overtime. 

[0:40:38.1] BD: Yeah, one of the things that is central to this whole idea of becoming more skillful is you have to become more perceptive about what you were doing. A lot of people who were practicing a skill, whatever the skill happens to be who aren’t noticing the somewhat smaller features of what they’re doing, really has no opportunity to improve and anybody who watches somebody teach a really good lesson or take a really good lesson, what you see is what really excellent teachers do is they help people know what to pay attention to. 

And that’s what’s a big part of the teaching is telling them what to do, right? Because when we develop skills, it’s not because someone told us to do something and now we do it. I mean would that it were that easy, right? But the part of our brain where skill memories are activated and where they went off is not something you can tell verbally or consciously to say, “Okay, do this now.” You have to just do it and as we were talking about a few minutes ago, in doing it you’re going to make some errors and you’re going to have to make adjustments. That are even below being able to control consciously. 

I mean Art plays the saxophone, the saxophone is one of the most inherently out of tune instruments, in terms of the way it’s built, of the wind family. I mean it is terribly out of tune. So if a saxophonist is going to play a scale in tune and all the notes are going to be in tuned, the saxophonist has to make all kinds of adjustments to the tension in their mouth and the placement of their tongue and the speed of the air and there’s no way to tell somebody, “Now this is where your tongue comes up a little bit, and this is where you squeeze a little bit with your arbiter.” 

There’s no way to do that. What you do is you listen to the sounds that you are making and somehow your body figures out through trial and error what kinds of things you need to do to play the scale in tune but that’s not going to happen if somebody doesn’t hear what an in-tuned scale sounds like and recognizes the discrepancies between the scale and playing now and the in tuned scale. So that’s a real challenge. 

I think a lot of people who see or if you are a golf fan. I am not a golfer but I bet that if you really love golf and you watch pros or you watch these videos that help you become better, one of the things that really, when you watch a great teacher whether you’re a pitching coach or a gold pro or whatever happens to be and you say, “What are they talking about the most?” They are getting the students to notice more about what they’re doing. Because if you don’t know really clearly what the goal is you’re trying to accomplish and recognize the discrepancies between what you’re doing now and what you’re trying to do. Well then the likelihood of improving at what you’re doing is really, really low. 

[0:43:06.5] AM: And what we know from a lot of studies is that the lower your level of performance in an area, the worse you are at judging your own performance. So that the least good performers are the ones who most over-estimate how good they are at whatever it was they just did and one of the things, and Bob talks about this a lot, one of the things that expert performers are really good at is identifying all of the flaws in what they just did so that they can improve them. And I think it’s just that self-monitoring ability is so crucial for improving your skills because you can’t fix and area you are not aware of. 

[0:43:44.8] BD: Yeah, exactly. 

[0:43:46.8] MB: That phrase, that line, is so important. “You can’t fix an area you are not aware of” and I think many times a lot of it comes from this kind of framework of mistake minimization that people are taught in school and elsewhere. There is such an almost subconscious incentive to bury your mistakes. To hide from your mistakes, to pretend like, “Oh I didn’t make any mistakes.” What are some ways that people can cultivate that self-awareness of their flaws in a way that is non-threatening to them? 

[0:44:10.9] BD: One of the most important things to do is to hang out with other people who acknowledge their flaws and you see this in industries. My favorite example is, and I talk about this a lot is the FAA. The airline industry you would think that if ever an industry wanted to hide it’s flaws it would be the aviation industry because if you scared people into thinking that aviation was unsafe then people wouldn’t stick themselves in a metal tube and allow themselves to be hurled through the air at hundreds of miles an hour. 

In fact, if you are a member of the aviation industry and you make an error, if you report that error through the system the FAA has developed within 24 hours and your error was not the result of breaking the law like coming to work drunk, then that error can’t influence your status with the company you work for. You can’t be fired, you can’t be reprimanded for that error and the reason for that is because the FAA actually takes all of those mistakes and catalogs them and uses that to figure out what changes in procedures, what changes in maintenance schedules are needed to keep aviation safe, which is why airplane flight is as safe as it is. 

The reason that this works is because the entire industry has decided that single mistakes are not the problem. The cascade of errors that leads to catastrophic failure is the problem and I think that by extension, whenever you spend time with a community of people who are willing to acknowledge their mistakes, it makes you much more comfortable in doing that yourself and I think that that’s just absolutely crucial for allowing yourself to continue to improve in all of the things you do.

[0:45:52.6] MB: I’d love to segue into a different topic just for a moment. You’ve talked about the importance of sleep. I’d love to hear your thoughts about why it’s critical to sleep and why sometimes doing things like pulling all-nighters is often not the most effective strategy. 

[0:46:07.4] AM: So we live in a chronically under-slept society in which people think that sleep is something that they’ll do when they’re dead. And it turns out that you spend about a third of your life asleep which means that it must play some important function and it really does. The brain is actually extraordinary active while you’re sleeping and it’s doing several different things. 
One of the things that brain is doing during sleep is actually clearing toxins out of the brain that build up over the course of the day partly just through the things that build up from using energy. And partly from other toxins that may come in through other activities people engage in. But on top of that, the brain is actually actively helping you to remember and to forget while you are asleep. So one of the stages of sleep actually helps with your skill learning. So if you’re learning to play a musical instrument and you practice a scale over and over, you get a little better while you’re practicing and then you get more better when you sleep. It actually smooth’s out the performance, the motor performance. 

In addition to that there are other stages of sleep that influence what’s called memory consolidation, that is it actually helps to burn in some of the most important memories. So if you study for a test before you go to sleep then after you wake up you have better memory than if you study for that test and then stay awake for the same amount of time. So sleep ends up having a big influence there as well and not only does it help you to remember, it also helps you to forget some of the less desirable things. 

So details of your day that were somewhat mundane tend to be lost while you are asleep and the emotional impact, particularly the negative emotional impact of things that happen to you will fade as you sleep and that’s important. Because we all know, we all have things happen to us where somebody gets really angry at somebody else for something they did and in the moment they’re really angry but overtime and in part because of sleep you begin to disengage your memory for the event from the emotional content of that event. Which is part of what enables you to get on with your life and to do other things with those people who may have done something to bother you. 

[0:48:22.9] MB: What is one piece of homework that you would give to people who are listening to this episode?

[0:48:27.6] AM: Bob you got some homework for people? 

[0:48:29.1] BD: I do and you know, I think I would spend a few minutes speaking about what are the things that I experienced, I have experienced in the past that bring me joy and I would schedule those into my week. I think a lot of people do a lot of drudgery that they think, “Well I’ll get this over with and then a week from now, a month from now, this summer or whenever they are thinking about it, I’ll schedule in a little happiness here,” and I think it’s important to schedule happiness into every day. 

That’s easier for some people than others because some people’s lives are easier than others. They have more privileges, they have more opportunities for choice, those kinds of things. But I think irrespective of your life circumstances, to be able to put yourself in situations where you think, even if it’s for five minutes, “I will have a conversation with a friend that I haven’t spoken to in a while or I’m going to take a walk,” or whatever it is that brings you some feeling of happiness and joy that that should be a part of every day.

[0:49:27.9] AM: Yeah and I’m going to add one thing to that, which is I think that as another piece of homework, find somebody you haven’t talked to in a while and ask them to talk in some amount of detail about what they’re doing and why they’re doing it and learn from the people around you. Learning doesn’t have to be drudgery. It doesn’t have to involve sitting in front of a big book and struggling through it. 

We learn a tremendous amount because we’re such social species from the people around us and taking the time to really sit down and have a great conversation with somebody and understand the way they think about things, can be a really valuable learning experience and at the same time also be a joyous one and I think having more of those conversations is a great thing to do. 

[0:50:10.6] MB: Where can people find the two of you and the book online?

[0:50:14.9] AM: I’m the designated self-promotion person in this duo. So the podcast we do, the radio show is called Two Guys On Your Head. It can be found wherever podcasts are found, so iTunes, Stitcher. You can go to twoguysonyourhead.org. If you’re on the Austin, Texas area of course we’re on KUT Radio in Austin and you can also find our book Brain Briefs, pretty much wherever books are sold except that our publisher is a division of Barnes & Nobles. So it’s not available as a Kindle book. The hard cover is available on Amazon, but they refused to make a Kindle so the seven nook readers have access to it. 

[0:50:53.5] MB: Well Art, Bob, I just want to say thank you so much for being on the show. I’ve really enjoyed this conversation and I know the listeners are going to get a ton out of all the incredible insights that both of you shared. 

[0:51:04.5] BD: Well thanks Matt, it’s been a real pleasure. Thanks for inviting us on. 

[0:51:07.3] AM: Yeah, this was great. Thank you. 

[0:51:09.4] MB: Thank you so much for listening to The Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story or just say hi, shoot me an email. My email is matt@scienceofsuccess.co. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every single listener email. 

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes. That helps more and more people discover The Science of Success. I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt how do you organize and remember all this information?” Because of that, we’ve created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. You can get it by texting the word “smarter” to the number 44222 or by go to scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. 

If you want to get all the incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we talked about in the show and much more, be sure to check out our show notes page. You can get it on our website, scienceofsuccess.co. Just hit the show notes button at the top. We have show notes for this episode and all of our previous episodes. 

Thanks again and we’ll see you on the next episode of The Science of Success.



January 12, 2017 /Lace Gilger
Best Of, Decision Making, Mind Expansion
53 - How One Simple Act Could Massively Transform Your Brain Chemistry Today - The Power of Kindness with John Wang-IG2-01.jpg

How One Simple Act Could Massively Transform Your Brain Chemistry Today - The Power of Kindness with John Wang

December 22, 2016 by Lace Gilger in Emotional Intelligence, Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss the incredible power of kindness, show how kindness triggers “the helpers high” and causes dopamine and oxytocin to flow through your brain, look at study data from 136 countries showing science behind why kindness is so powerful, we walk through several concrete examples you can use RIGHT NOW to take action and be kind to someone today, and much more with John Wang.

John Wang has spent the past several years researching the scientifically proven benefits that being kind to others has on our own lives. Making us not only happier, but healthier, and even more attractive! John is also the founder of The One Kindness Challenge which transformed a personal experience into a mission to spread the healing powers of kindness. Through unique accessories called kindness bands, The One Kindness Challenge seeks to remind us to commit at least one act of kindness each day and to help spread the message of kindness wherever we go. 

  • How John’s personal challenge transformed into a mission

  • John’s Lessons learned from taking homeless people out to lunch for a year

  • How John’s visit to Nepal after the Nepalese earthquake changed his life

  • The evolutionary purpose of Kindness

  • Why people aren’t kind often enough

  • Johns experience from practicing radical honesty for an entire year

  • What is the one kindness challenge?

  • We walk through the feelings and experiences of a moment of kindness

  • Kindness is triggered by the Vagus Nerve

  • How kindness triggers “the helpers high” and causes dopamine and oxytocin to flow through your brain

  • Even the smallest acts can trigger the same effect as large acts of kindness

  • Consistency in kindness it he MOST important thing

  • 21 day challenge will transform your life

  • Why kindness is more important now than ever

  • How one Uber ride can change your life

  • Its not about the words its about making a connection

  • How social media has replaced real connection with fake connections

  • How a single smile could transform someone’s life

  • We dig deep into the science behind kindness

  • How study data from 136 countries showcased the incredible power of kindness

  • We walk through several concrete examples you can use RIGHT NOW to take action and be kind to someone TODAY

  • John shares some incredibly inspiring stories from his own life about sharing and creating kindness

  • Research data showing how kindness literally makes you live longer

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Website] One Kindness Challenge

  • [Website] One Kindness Challenge - Kindness Ideas

  • [Book] Radical Honesty: How to Transform Your Life by Telling the Truth by Brad Blanton

  • [Video] "Unsung Hero" (Official HD) : TVC Thai Life Insurance 2014

  • [Video] Stealing Can Be Forgiven, Thai Commercial

  • [Video] Free Hugs Campaign

  • [Video] Denali

  • [Book] Why Kindness is Good For You by Dr. David Hamilton PhD

Research Links

  • Prosocial Spending and Happiness: Using Money To Benefit Others Pays Off - Students were given $5 or $20 and some told to spend it on themselves and others told to spend on others. Those who spent on others actually ended up being happier and the more they spent on others the happier they were. This research also held up across countries, even poor countries.

  • From Chronic Pain Patient to Peer: Benefits and Risks of Volunteering - Study examines the effect volunteering had on chronic pain patients. They found after volunteering they reported less pain and also feelings of depression went down.

  • Psychological Differences in Elderly Volunteers vs. Non-Volunteers - Volunteer workers over age sixty-five were compared to retired elderly who did not engage in any type of work activity. Volunteers were found to have significantly higher degree of life satisfaction, stronger will to live, and fewer symptoms of depression, anxiety, and somatization.

  • Reactions To Random Acts Of Kindness - We gave 122 people a flower. We did not find significant differences in reactions to kindness by age of the receiver. However, we did find that women responded more positively to kindness than did men. Also people tended to respond more positively to kindness when the giver was white regardless of the race of the receiver.

  • Sex Differences in Mate Preferences: Evolutionary Hypothesis Tested in 37 Countries - Study shows that being kind actually does make you more attractive and this was found across cultures.

  • Volunteer Work and Well-Being - This study shows that volunteers actually reported feeling more satisfied and have greater life satisfaction and self-esteem.

  • Volunteering and depression: the role of psychological and social resources in different age groups - There are a number of reasons why volunteering might yield mental health benefits, especially to older people. Volunteer work improves access to social and psychological resources, which are known to counter negative moods such as depression and anxiety. Analysis of three waves of data from the Americans' Changing Lives data set (1986, 1989, 1994) reveals that volunteering does lower depression levels for those over 65, while prolonged exposure to volunteering benefits both populations.

  • Volunteering Is Associated With Delayed Mortality In Older People

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

[00:00:06.4] ANNOUNCER: Welcome to the Science of Success with your host, Matt Bodnar.

[00:00:12.4] MB: Welcome to The Science of Success. I’m your host, Matt Bodnar. I’m an entrepreneur and investor in Nashville, Tennessee, and I’m obsessed with the mindset of success and the psychology of performance. I’ve read hundreds of books, conducted countless hours of research and study, and I am going to take you on a journey into the human mind and what makes peak performers tick, with the focus on always having our discussion rooted in psychological research and scientific fact, not opinion.

In this episode, we discuss the incredible power of kindness, show how kindness triggers the helpers high and causes dopamine and oxytocin to flow through your brain, look at study data from 136 countries showing the science behind why kindness is so powerful. We walk through several concrete examples you can use right now to take action to be kind to someone today, and much more, with John Wang. 

The Science of Success continues to grow, with more than 685,000 downloads, listeners in over a hundred countries, hitting number one New and Noteworthy, and more. A lot of our listeners are curious about how to organize and remember all the information that we talk about on this show. I get tons of listener emails asking me, “Matt, how do you keep track of all of this incredible knowledge that you get from reading hundreds of books, interviewing amazing experts, listening to podcasts and more?” 

Because of that, I’ve created an awesome resource for you. It’s called, “How to organize and remember everything.” You can get it completely for free, all you have to do is text the word “smarter” to the number, 44222. It’s a guide, again, we created called, “How to organize and remember everything.” Listeners love it, I get emails all the time from people telling me how great it is, and how it’s helped them organize all the incredible information they get from this show, and all the other things in their lives they used to improve themselves.  Again, you can get it completely for free. All you have to do is to text the word “smarter” to the number 44222, or go to scienceofsuccess.co and put in your email. 

In our previous episode, we discussed the errors people make in their reasoning and how to correct them. We explained a number of statistical principles to help sharpen your thinking and make you a better decision maker. We looked at why every $1 spent on a Scared Straight program creates $400 in additional cost to the criminal justice system. We talked about the illusion of objectivity, why you should not rely on your intuition, and much more, with Dr. Richard Nisbett. If you want to make better decisions and build a tool kit to do that, listen to that episode. 

[0:02:30.2] MB: Today, we have another exciting guest on the show, John Wang. John has spent the past several years researching the scientifically proven benefits that being kind to others has in our own lives, making us not only happier, but healthier and even more attractive. He’s also the founder of the One Kindness Challenge, which transformed a personal experience into a mission to spread the healing power of kindness. We’re going to dig more into that, but John, welcome to the Science of Success. 

[0:02:53.1] JW: Thanks Matt, I appreciate that. 

[0:02:55.0] MB: Well, we’re super excited to have you on here. For listeners who may not be familiar with you or the One Kindness Challenge, tell us a little bit about yourself. Tell us your story. 

[0:03:02.3] JW: Well man, every single year I try to take on a little personal challenge for myself. So like, one year, I did radical honesty, which is you have to go and tell only the truth. You can’t lie, not even lies of omission, and ever since that one year, I got addicted to seeing how I could push my personal experience in life, which gave a new perspective on how I view the world. 

One other year following that is that I started taking people I was meeting on the street, especially homeless people, out for lunch. So every single day, if I see somebody who’s homeless, I would just say, “Hey buddy, can I take you out to lunch and then chat with you about your story?” And then we’d chat over lunch, and they were telling me what their life journey has been, and it was mind blowing. A lot of these people have such rich stories and histories. 

So this year, I was kind of without a story, and I realized that I didn’t really have missions myself. I didn’t really know what I was doing. I reached a point in my life where I was pretty happy and comfortable with what I wanted, but I wasn’t really sure what I wanted to take on, what the next challenge was. Now I travel a lot, so I’ve been to over 40 different countries. Travelling around the world, I saw a lot of different cultures, but earlier this year, I was in Nepal. 

I don’t know if everyone is aware, but Nepal has just gone through one of the worst natural disasters of an earthquake over the last year and it has done some really tremendous damage to the country. But when I was there and I was seeing that even though there was a lot of changes that these people have had suffered through, infrastructure, some of the stuff wasn’t working, they were having electric shortages, they were having shortages of gasoline and stuff like that, I found that the people there were probably some of the most giving and warm people I have ever met. 

I mean, people were going out of their way to try to add to our lives and help us in any way. At one point, I was coming back from this little hike, and we’re stranded on the street, and I had three different cars stop and ask if they could give us a ride. I was blown away. I was like, “You guys have gasoline shortages, so why are you trying to give this random stranger rides?” and they were just saying, “Well, because it’s just a thing that you do and it adds to your life.” 

So that philosophy really stuck around with me. So I came back to North America, and I was just going about my day, and I was just realizing that it was the winter time and I was having low days, and I was just low on energy and stuff like that. One day I was driving up out of an event, and I was with a friend, and on the street I saw this guy that I’ve known. I wasn’t very close with him, but I have met him at a couple of events, I met him at a couple of parties. 

I pulled over and I said, “Hey buddy, where are you going? Do you need to go somewhere? Let me give you a ride,” and he said, “Well yeah, I need to get groceries. I could walk.” I was like, “No, hop in. I’m going to drive you to get groceries,” and so he hopped in, and it was at 1 AM, so we had to drive all around downtown Vancouver looking for a grocery store that’s open 24 hours, but we found a place, and we hopped in to the grocery store. 

We walked around, and we chatted and we laughed, we got to bond a little bit, and at the end of it, he was so thankful. He was like, “Look man, I really appreciate this. I was going to just take a walk over, and that would have added another hour to my evening. So I just want to say I really appreciate what you’ve done,” and I was like, “No worries,” because at that moment I felt so incredibly happy. It was this random bizarre thing, I was having a low day. I was having this tired day and I was like, “Man I feel really great!” I feel like stoked, I feel excited. I was enthusiastic.

So I came back home and I was like, “Is there a reason for this?” Because I was always a little bit of a psychology and science nerd, so I’m like, “There’s got to be studies about this.”  So I [unintelligible] and did a Google on kindness and how it makes us feel, like, where is that coming from. As it turns out, there’s been tons of studies done, but we just have been terrible at talking about it. As it turns out, kindness isn’t just a thing that you do for other people. It is directly tied into how it makes us feel, and we’re going to talk about this later on, but there’s an evolutionary purpose to why it is that kindness is one of the strongest driving forces in making us happier and I just thought that was really cool.

 So after the event, I was like, “Well dude, I’ve got to get this out there. I’ve got to get other people doing this, and feeling like this all the time, because if just this one little act could make me feel so much happier, and so much more energized, and so much more passionate, what will happen to the world if we get thousands of people doing this?” So anyway, that’s how the One Kindness movement started, and we went and started doing research on how we could best remind people, because I mean, honestly, I think most people want to be kind. 

I think it’s not really a surprise to say kindness makes us feel good. Everybody knows that, but we just didn’t know why. We just didn’t know how it made us feel, exactly what the process was, what exact chemicals are going through our brain, what is that trigger that makes you feel the hit of dopamine and see that rise in your oxytocin levels? The biggest reason why we don’t do it often is usually because we don’t get reminded of it enough. 

And that was the second part of it. Well okay, we need something to create a psychological anchor, and in the past, I did a little bit of research into NLP and how anchors work, and I was like, “Wow, well why don’t we merge that together? Why don’t we create something that can create a physical reminder that, whenever we looked at, it would remind us of how we felt, and it will remind us of why we do this, and even more powerfully, it will remind other people of why we do this. 

So the band, basically, if you want to take a look at it, and you can check out designs of the band, it’s on our website, which is onekindness.org. It’s just a simple wristlet, like a bracelet, and then there’s a little part where you can flip it over, and once you flip it over, you could see our logo. So every single morning, you start by wearing the bracelet on one side, which says One Kindness, which just reminds you go out there and do one kindness, one act of kindness. 

Because really, it is a daily consistent act that build ups, and after you do your one act of kindness you flip the band around, and then you see the logo, and it just reminds you that you have done it. Other people see it, and they’re like, “You’ve done it!” They remind you of that, and you get to inspire the people around you to do more of that. Isn’t that cool? 

[0:09:11.5] MB: That’s awesome. I mean, that’s some fascinating challenges that you’ve put yourself through. I mean, everything from radical honestly to taking homeless people out to lunch for a year, that must have been really, really insightful, and I can see how that inspired the journey towards the One Kindness Challenge. 

[0:09:26.9] JW: Yeah, radical honesty was a fun experience, I will say. It was a difficult experience. I mean, not to say that I’m not an honest person most of the time. I am, and I try to be, but you’d be surprised at how often we tell these nice little pleasant lies that kind of, it’s a way just to make our day a little bit easier. If somebody asks you, “Hey, how are you doing?” and we go, “Great,” even if you’re having a crappy day, and we think well, what’s wrong with that? 

We don’t want other people to get involved, we don’t want to start a huge conversation. That makes a lot of sense, but as it turns out, a lot of dishonesty actually creates a sense of disconnection from people. So if you ever get a chance to check out the book Radical Honesty. It’s by a brilliant psychologist. His name is Robert Blanton, and he started a movement about radical honesty, but we’ll get into that some other day, because I think today we’ll just talk about kindness.

[0:10:22.0] MB: Definitely. So you touched on and talked a little bit about the band. Just to reiterate, what is the One Kindness Challenge itself? 

[0:10:28.9] JW: It’s actually a really simple thing. Now at the end of the day, like I said, we all want to do kind things. We all realize the power behind kindness, but it’s easy to forget, even right here with us right now. You could think of a time where you’ve done an act of kindness, it could be recently, or it could be from a little while back ago, and I want you to picture that. Picture what it is that you’ve done, or picture what it is that you’ve been seeing somebody else do, and how that made you feel, how that experience felt. 

Like, just take a moment, just really immerse yourself in that memory and how did that make you feel? What are the feelings that you’re going through? What are the experiences that you’re going through in your body? And in that moment, even just now when you are remembering it, when you are picturing yourself there now, what you’re experiencing could be one of a few things. Maybe you are experiencing some level of warmth. Like warmth that is starting up at your chest area, and it could be feeling like this calmness, this serenity and happiness. 

So what is happening there is that your kindness is actually triggered by this thing called the vagus nerve, which is right at base of our brainstem, and the vagus nerve basically controls things like your digestive track and your body functions, but more importantly, it controls your heart and your heartrate. So this has been linked in a lot of ways, the Vegas Nerve to empathy, and feelings of sympathy and empathy, which is why a lot of times when we see somebody doing act of kindness, you get that same feeling as if when you were doing it yourself. 

If you have ever watched those videos, you can go into these great series of videos that are made by a Thai insurance company, and one of the videos has this guy just going around doing these daily simple acts of kindness, and he’s just going around helping people do things like water plants, and helping old ladies cross the street, helping street vendors, giving some money away to somebody who’s perhaps living on the street and not as fortunate as he is, and he’s not a rich man or anything like that. He’s no Bill Gates, he’s no Elon Musk, or some great philanthropist, he’s just some guy trying to make people’s lives better. Every time I watch that video, I get that same feeling. I want to tear up. I just feel like this amazing sense of joy and everything like that. 

So what I’m experiencing, what you’re experiencing in that moment when you’re watching that and feeling that, and remembering that, is that you’re getting a hit of dopamine. You’re getting this hit of oxytocin in your body, where that level is going up, and you’re feeling what scientist have now called “The Helper’s High”. It actually is kind of a high, because you really do get this thrill from it. So our goal with the movement is very, very simple. 

We’re trying to get as many people doing a daily act of kindness, and like I said, it doesn’t matter if you’re doing a massive act like, “Oh, I’m going to go out and help build a shelter, build a hospital down in Peru,” or if you are doing something extremely simple, which is just like, “I am going to open a door for somebody, I’m going to help that lady in the parking lot with her groceries. I’m going to go up at someone and say, ‘Hey listen, I just want to say I really appreciate you and what you’ve done.’” 

Or you might write a note of thank you to my old high school teacher, or my old friend who once helped me and I never got to really express that. All of those count as acts of kindness, and the funny thing about that is that, as it turns out in these studies, there’s not a massive difference between the size of the work that we do, but there is a massive difference in the consistency. 

Which is to say, if you do one act, like let’s say you do one massive act in one day, and then you don’t do anything again for six months, the effect of that is not anywhere near as powerful as if you were to do, let’s say, 21 days of these smaller acts, which is why we tell the people who are part of our movement, we say, “Look, you could participate in this, we hope you participate in it forever, just what an amazing thing you’ll be doing in the world, but at the very least, try it for 21 days. Do it once a day for 21 days, and see how it makes you feel.” 

I can guarantee you, it will change your life. It would change the way you see the world. It would change the way people look at you, which is another thing that we talked about, which is actually kindness makes you look more attractive to the opposite sex, and to other people, which is great, but it would change your lifestyle. It would change how you feel. So our goal is to try to get a million acts of kindness out there, because it’s very clear that right now, we need to more kindness in this world more than ever. 

Whatever your politics is, whatever your background or culture or history is, I think it’s pretty clear that right now the world is going through some changes that, let’s just say, there may be more to this, right? People are becoming a little bit more disconnected. People are becoming a little bit more distant from each other. So we need to build that back into our societies. So that’s what the movement is about, We’re trying to get people to go out there and do 21 acts of kindness at the very minimum, and just watch their lives change. 

[0:15:24.7] MB: You know the insurance company commercial that you mentioned, which we’ll include in the show notes, is amazing. The first time I watched it, there’s a moment where some of the seeds that he planted, I don’t want to spoil it, but it starts to show, to bear fruit, I guess, and I literary broke down bawling and crying. It was such a powerful video, so I definitely recommend everybody listening to check that video out. It takes three minutes, and you’ll definitely get a huge emotional reaction and a hit of oxytocin, dopamine, etcetera, but I think you made a really good point.

[0:15:56.6] JW: I think it was you who told me about the video, Matt. I actually think it was. We were on a call before, and you were going and were like, “Oh, you’ve got to go check out this video,” and you’re absolutely right. I started to bawl. I am not a person who gets emotional very easily. I’m not a person who cries very easily, but man, when I saw the video I definitely started tearing up. 

[0:16:16.5] MB: Yeah, it’s super powerful, but for listeners who want to check it out, it will be in the show notes and you can find it there and watch it. I think you made another really good point as well, which is that regardless of the current political climate and everything else, even with just the advent of the internet and the way that people consume information today, we’re so much more solo and cut off from other people in many ways. 

You know, being a millennial myself, when I want to order food, I would rather interact with a phone than go interact with a person, you know what I mean? And so finding a way to reach out and connect with people, I think, is really, really powerful.

[0:16:49.5] JW: I completely agree with you, and I am exactly like that. I’ve got all of these ordering apps, and if you take a look at what made Uber very popular in a lot of ways, it’s not just the fact that it’s a convenient way to get a taxi. It’s also the fact that now there’s a way that we can just enter the address, and we could pretty much just hop in the car, never say a word, and then arrive, and then hop out of the car and just be like, “Yeah, thanks.” 

[0:17:12.6] MB: Sorry, I didn’t mean to cut you, I was going to say the funny thing about Uber is it’s funny, because it definitely taps into that dynamic. I’ve had so many interesting experiences with Uber drivers, where if you just engage them, you can peer into their lives and have some really fascinating moments of connection in a 10-minute car ride. So you can flip the script a little bit, and if you want to, it’s a really cool opportunity to meet people that are totally outside of your sphere of influence, or the way that you normally live your life. 

[0:17:39.7] JW: I absolutely agree with you. It’s one of those things that’s easy for you to make a connection with somebody, and note that that’s what I always really emphasize. That it’s not just about saying hi. It’s not about the word, it’s about making a connection, and we’re really lacking at that right now in society, because we have Snapchat, we have Facebook. I have, I think, over a dozen different messaging apps on my phone. I don’t even know why I have so many. 

I’m like, “I have this one.” I’m pretty sure that at a certain point, I’m going to start having more connectivity services than I have real friends that I hang out with, and there’s something not right about that, but we’ve replaced real connection with this kind of false image of connection. We replaced going up to somebody and saying like, “Wow, I saw the picture of your trip. That was amazing! Tell me about what the trip was like,” with Facebook likes and Instagram hearts. We’ve turned into this O-connection society, which is a tragedy, because there’s so much to be had in making that human connection, that we never know how much power that is. We’re becoming more and more disbanded. We’re becoming more and more lonely, but there is so much power in reconnecting. 

You know, in the 1970’s, there was once a man who walked onto the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, and then he crawled over the ledge where there is a railing, and he sits there and he thought for a moment, and he jumped. He plummeted 220 feet or so, hit the water, and didn’t make it. 

His psychologist, who with the help of the medical team afterwards, basically went to his apartment to try to find out what had happened. His psychologist’s name is Dr. Motto, and they went into the guy’s house, and they went up to his desk and his bureau, and on his bureau was this note, and all it said on there was, “I’m going to the Golden Bridge today. If one person smiles at me along the way, I will not jump.” And it was such a harrowing moment. 

The psychologist, later on, had an interview with the New Yorker, was recounting this experience as it’s something that’s so small, that was all he was looking for. I’m not saying that that’s the only thing that that person needed, and I am not saying that all the people who are going through depression or difficulties, that’s all it takes to get them out of it. Certainly, I don’t want to diminish the experiences and the difficulties that they’re going through. 

But day to day life, from what most of us are looking for, is not a massive thing. We don’t necessarily want to have 15,000 best friends, but on a day to day basis, we just want that human connection. That’s what we are. We are humans, we’re social creatures. We started off as social creatures, and we still are social creatures, and technology has started to replace real connection with messages, and Instagram likes, and all these things that aren’t real human-to-human emotions. 

And that affects our physiology, that affects our psychology at a very deep level, because that is what we are, evolutionarily speaking, accustomed to, and we’ve had that taken away from us, right? Which is a tragedy in this day and age. I was recently at a conference called Socialite, which is a gathering of all these people who are talking about various things that make the world a better place, and talking about things like entrepreneurship and businesses that have these social elements built in. 

For example, Tom Shoes is a great example of this. They have this thing that they do where if you buy a pair of shoes, they would give away a pair of shoes to somebody who is needy, and I was very fortunate to have been invited to be the opening speaker there, and we talked about the One Kindness movement, and the project, and how were going to get a million acts of kindness out there in the world, and get all these people, hundreds of thousands of people to do daily acts of kindness, and seeing what the effect would be. 

The crowd was absolutely phenomenal, that they were excited about the idea, and what was really cool with that, after I gave the talk, people are coming up to me and they were telling me about all their stories, and they’re telling me about all their experiences, and how they felt after they heard it, and I was like, “You know what? Do me a favor. Go out there, go do your acts of kindness, and after you’ve done them, send me a message if you experienced something of a change.” 

And you would not believe the messages I got back. You would not believe people’s stories. There’s one story of somebody who went to a nearby café, bought a cup of coffee and she started this thing where you start a coffee chain. Basically, buy a coffee for someone else. She was going in there, she’s like, “I’m going to start a coffee chain. I’m going to buy a cup of coffee for the person behind me,” and you can do that. Almost all cafés will let you do this. “I’m going to buy a cup of coffee, and I want to buy a cookie for the person behind me, for the next person who comes in.” They’re usually really happy to do this, because it’s a fun cool way — I remember, I think, recently there was one big one that lasted for days. It was like — people, like hundreds of people, are coming in buying something, and then buying something else for the person behind them.

It just like, a part of the movement like that. This woman was like, she walked to the barista and she said, “Hey listen, I want to start this thing,” and they’re you know, really happy to oblige when she said, “I also just want to say, you know, I really appreciate the work that you do. You might not have heard this enough, but I really appreciate that you’re here, and you’re making my life better, and you’re making the lives of other people better.”

The barista apparently just started to tear up, like, “I haven’t heard something like that in a long time, so thank you.” Just like that, they have this amazing human connection, right? The science behind it is fascinating though. The science behind kindness is really fascinating. For example, I’ll talk about one publication over at Harvard, you can go and check it out, I’ll ask Mat here to give you guys a link here.

Harvard published a study done by three different scholars, Elizabeth Dunn, Lara Achnen, hoping I’m pronouncing them correctly, and Michael Norgen. They went on and did a study, basically, about trying to see how spending, what they call “pro-social spending,” which is spending on, not just yourself, but other people, have an impact on you the giver, right? We all know that giving it to somebody else, the person who receives it loves it, but what is the difference in how it makes us feel?

What they did was pretty interesting. They approached a bunch of people, and then they broke up in two groups. For the first group, they were given $20, and they were told, go and spend this $20 on yourself. Go buy yourself something you want. They measured their happiness levels before and after. For the second group, they gave them the same amount of money, here’s 20 bucks, go out there and spend it on somebody else. The only thing is it can’t be somebody who can reciprocate. You can’t just give it to your friend to like, “Yo, I’m going to buy you a meal today, but tomorrow you go buy a meal back,” right? You have to give it to somebody else who you think you’re going to make their life better. 

A lot of these people, all the participants are university students, they’re not very well off. The 20 bucks is, I mean, the time I was in the university, it’s a few beers, right? It’s something that can make a difference. They went out there, and they were expecting, because one of the professors or one of the researchers was part of Harvard business school, of course, they kind of have this hypothesis that personal spending will bring back greater joy. 

When they came back, they found that not only was it not true that that personal spending, when you spend money on yourself, will give you more joy, the group that came back with having spent money on other people found a massive increase of happiness. They were coming back reporting significant increases to their happiness. They’re like okay, apparently spending money on other people can be an effective root at creating your own happiness, at hitting those particular chemicals. 

That’s pretty interesting, but then they thought about and they said, “Well, what if we’re doing this, and just the fact that $20 is not a big deal? What if people aren’t feeling the essence of loss,” because we talk about things like loss of virtue, we talk about things like fear of loss all the time, what if $20 is just not that big of a deal? They said, “What if we up that amount to something significant like a thousand dollars?” They went back to the university and they said, you know, “Can we have like, a million dollars to give away to people?” and the university is like, “No.” What they did was, well, you know, okay, what if we take a look at countries in which $20 have the same spending powers?

That’s what they did. They went out and they examined the correlations between charitable giving and happiness in over 136 countries, which is ridiculous. In particular, they would go to these third world countries in, you know, Asia and Africa, and they would go and talk to the people there, and they would bring in participants and they will be like, well here’s, which over there had about the spending power of, I think they did the calculation, something around $800, which is massive, basically.

It has the spending power of basically buying food for them for almost several weeks, if not a whole month. A lot of these people didn’t have enough food to cover their own basic needs. This should be significant now, we should see a decrease in the amount of happiness, because they’re giving away food that they actually need to survive, right? What was interesting was that, in this one, for the group that were tasked to give away this amount of money, and I think that they also have them like, buy treats, or like, give away little bags of food, and snacks, and other things that could really make a difference in their own lives.

That group came back reporting massive, absolutely off the charts changes in their happiness levels. They were fascinated. They were blown away. Why is this change so massive? I mean, shouldn’t you be feeling that same thing that we talked about? We talked about things like you know, level. We talk about things like gain theory.

We talked about things that were — people don’t like watching other people have more stuff in general. Why are they feeling this? As it turns out, there were talks of participants and the participants would say things like, you know, “Look, it’s been years since I’ve ever been able to make somebody’s life like that better. To get that opportunity was huge for me,” and they loved it. They loved that feeling of helping, and they loved wanting to feel that helper’s high that we were just talking about.

It’s really incredible, and there’s been studies done that show the same thing across different age groups. I have a study where scientists have brought in children, and they were tasked — and we’re talking, like really young little kids, really adorable little kids, five to seven years old. They were told that you’re going to come in, and we’re going to have a photographer take some pictures of you, but when they came in they’re like, “The photographer’s not here yet, so why don’t you sit here and have a little snack.” They will be given two different places, and plates had this whole thing covering it. In front of the two kids, they would raise the two covers at the same time, and one of the kid’s plate, there will be food, there will be a sandwich.

Then in the other kid’s plate, there will be nothing. They wanted to see what the kids would do, because we know kids, and I’ve been around kids a bunch of times, and I have like nieces and nephews and stuff like that. Kids can sometimes be kind of jerks, right? There’s nothing wrong with that, but kids can be kind of selfish sometimes, right? They were kind of surprised to see that idea that we’ve had, like kids can be kind of selfish sometimes, is really not something that we see at ages of three to five years old, or even two to four years old.

It’s something that we kind of learn later on, and it’s an interesting phenomenon. Because with the younger kids, they found, there’s a higher rate where the kids would just pick up the food that they have, tear the sandwich in half, and then put one half on the other kid’s plate. Again, this is without any instruction, this is without any kind of prompting or anything like that. They just naturally wanted to give. I think that tells us a lot about the way our instincts are. They even did studies where they would examine what the actions and instincts of toddlers, literally one to two years old, that can barely walk the age that they were measuring, one year old.

They will find that even at that age, kids are natural — their natural instinct is to help other people. It’s an interesting phenomenon that it’s something that we almost forget the older we get. It’s something that we almost get taught to let go of the older we get.

[0:29:30.0] MB: It’s so fascinating that you know, at the same — obviously the research behind this is really compelling, and it’s science-based, but at the same time, its’ such a simple thing that one kind of almost minuscule act of kindness can create a ripple where, like the coffee chain you're talking about, where you don’t even understand, really, the full impact that you might have just by smiling at somebody, or just by saying thank you, or holding the door for them. Something that to you almost seems insignificant, it can create a wave of kindness that goes beyond what you can even potentially imagine.

[0:30:03.6] JW: Yeah, absolutely. In ourselves and in others. Because we don’t know what it is that the other person is going through, right? We don’t know what the other person is experiencing. Something as simple as just smiling at somebody, you know? Walking down the street. I had a friend who once was having a bad day, and decided to just sort of take him on — this was back when we were in a university, and he was just like, you know, I wonder how many people are going through what I’m going through?

He started walking around campus and he just — it was exam season, when everybody was stressed out. He started walking around campus and he would go up to random people, just walking, having their day, and he would go up to them and ask, “Hey, are you okay? You look like you’re about to cry.”

The first person he talked to and asked that question started to cry. He was like, “My god, I’m so sorry, I didn’t mean to trigger that.” The other person was like, “No, thank you. I really appreciate that. I am really stressed out and I really appreciate you asking that.” He was like, “Well, is this just the students?” This is not really that scientific, he wasn’t doing this as a part of a study, nothing like the studies that we’re just talking about.

This is a little bit anecdotal, but then he started to do this on a regular basis where he would start going up to people and asking, “Are you okay? You look like you’re having a tough day.” We would think that would be a kind of rude thing to say to somebody, but you know, he wanted to take that chance to see if he can make somebody else’s say better, and he was just constantly coming back and telling us how you encounter somebody who was actually going through something really tough, and we always put on this brave face, and we try to take it on ourselves. We try to take it on independently, because we’re taught to do that.

But you know, a simple thing like a smile, just “Hey, listen, I appreciate what you're doing here,” and like, “Hey, I really like your scarf. I just want to tell you that your eyes light up the room for me.” These little things that we’ve become so afraid to break that social gap to say, social wall to say, can have a tremendous difference in other people’s lives, right?

[0:31:54.7] MB: That kind of segues in to what are some of the — we’ve talked about a couple of really simple examples. What are some of the other things that somebody listening right now who says, “Okay, I’m fired up, I want to be kind. I want to kind of do a random act of kindness. or find a stranger and do something.” What are some kind of really simple ideas or actions that they can take in terms of ways to jump start that are things they can specifically do?

[0:32:17.0] JW: That’s a great question. You know, we actually, if you go to our website, which is again onekindness.org, or onekindnesschallenge.com, it goes the same page. We actually have a list of that, of things that you can do. Small acts of kindness, medium acts of kindness, major acts of kindness, and the reason for that is because a lot of times we tested the number one question we get that which is, what is this something that I can do?

I’ll give you a few examples here, but if somebody was listening, if you’re interested, you can go check out the website, and there’s a place where you could put in your email and all we do is we send you one thing you can do that day. There’s no spam, I promise we’re not selling anything, so if we just get a little idea of this is one kindness idea for the day. These are things that you can do. For example, leave a note thanking someone who you appreciate. This is something that takes no time. Literally no time. Just sit down, it takes you maybe 30 seconds, just grab a piece of paper and write down one person who you can thank. I’ll bet you can think of someone right now.

Just say, “Listen, hey, I just want to thank you very much,” and you could either give it to them as a note, because we don’t do paper anymore, we’re so used to this text messages, but they don’t have the same impact. But write a little note for them, put it in an envelope, and just give it to them. Or if you don’t want to do that, you feel that person is too far away and you don’t want to mail them something, take a picture of that note with your phone and send that picture to them. This is huge, there’s some kind of thing, I don’t know what it is, but there’s something that’s really nice about seeing that somebody has taken the time to go through the old school and archaic methods of pen and paper to write a note, and they will see that and it becomes fulfilled.

Another thing you can do is just, let’s say if you’re at work or you’re at school, whatever it is. Bring over — like, Halloween just passed not too long ago, but you know, go and get some Halloween-sized candy, right? You can get it at any Costco, or any shopping center, really. Just pass it on, “Here, have this candy,” or when you're walking by a parking meter and you see someone’s parking meter, and you see someone’s parking meter has run out or something like that, or something needs change, give them some change. 

This is probably the biggest one. A lot of people say, “I give change to people every day. I don’t feel better. I’m usually putting that out,” but yeah, there’s a difference, because you’re not making a connection with that person. If you're going to give homeless people some change, usually I recommend buying them a sandwich or something like that. They’re hungry, but especially because sometimes you know, there’s people who are struggling with it alcoholism, for example. 

Aside from giving them help, aside from giving them food, or money, or whatever it is, have a conversation with them. Just ask, “Hey, how are you doing? How has it been going, what has your day been like?” and just connect with them. That on its own has sometimes massive impact. I would love to tell a story about that, we have time for that, Matt?

[0:34:55.1] MB: Absolutely, I’d love to hear the story.

[0:34:57.2] JW: Okay, a few weeks ago, I went out with girlfriends, and we just — it was getting cold over here in Vancouver, and we decided that we’re just going to just give out some socks and gloves to some homeless people. In this area in Vancouver called the Downtown East Side, which is basically Vancouver’s sort of area of, let’s say, like tent city, basically. There’s a lot of homeless people there. There’s a lot of people who are going through issues, substance abuse, and drug use, and like that.

We just thought, you know, it’s getting cold, right? Winter is coming. We wanted to give away some socks to warm them up a little bit. We’re having a great time, we’re giving away these things, and there was this — in our group, there was just something like seven or eight of us, and there’s three kids who would come along. They’re about, you know, ages between about let’s say, 10 to 13, and it was somebody, a part of our group, one of our friends had brought her nieces and nephews, because she thought it would be a nice teachable moment.

We came across this particular woman and she was very clearly cold. She was shivering while she was walking up to us, right? She was wearing this thin cardigan, she didn’t have any socks on, and then she was carrying this little bag of candy. It was — I sort of remember it was this mangled Sour Patch kids candy, and she was eating them. I assumed that she was eating them because she wanted the sugar, because sugar kind of boosts your serotonin levels as well.

She was walking up to us and I said, “Hey, listen, would you like some socks? Looks like you’re a little cold,” and she’s like, “Sure!” She thanked us and we gave her some socks, a hat, and some gloves. She was appreciative, but she was kind of like, “Yeah, thanks.” Then she just turned to the kids who were there with us, and she reached out her hand which was carrying this bag of candy, and she takes the kids and she said, “Hey kids, would you like some candy?”

The kids, without a moment of hesitation, reached out, grabbed the candy, each popped in their mouth, at which point all of the adults in the group were just going like, we had this moment of panic. We’re on the downtown side, there was a lot of diseases and drug use, and we’re just concerned that something may — food God, like whatever could happen, right?

You don’t take candy from a stranger like that. You know, in our moment of judgment and panic, the woman who just gave away candy kind of looked at the three kids and said, “You know, for the past two months, every day I eat this candy, and I’ve been trying to give it to people, but nobody would ever take a piece. Thank you for taking a piece of my candy today, you guys have made my night.”

She had this massive smile on her face. It was this — she looked like a different person. She wasn’t nearly as happy when she was taking the gloves that we were giving her, she was just so happy that she got to give, right? Think about that. All she did was she offered a piece of candy, but in that moment, that changed in her happiness massively. This is what I’m saying, is that if you’re going to give out some change to homeless people or something like that, don’t just drop some change and walk away. 

Take a moment, ask, “Hey, how are you doing?” Connect with them, they’re human beings, right? Connect to them as human beings. So many people we’re meeting were telling me like, you know, back when I was doing these challenges of taking out homeless people to lunch, one of the biggest things I was constantly hearing was it’s incredible how you can go through an entire day without a single person acknowledging you as a human being.

Without a single person stopping to make eye contact even, without a single person who isn’t trying to pretend that you don’t exist, right? Even something like that is an act of kindness. That’s a small act, right? Buy coffee, or offer to make a coffee run. If you’re going up, if you’re going to go grab a cup of coffee somewhere and there’s somebody around you, you should be asking them, “Hey buddy, can I get you some?”

Especially if they’re a friend, right? “Hey, listen, I’m going down to grab a coffee, you want something?” Right? Or, “I’m going to the vending machine, you want anything,” right? If you want to go a little bit further, take a look around your home. Do you have books that you don’t need? Take them to a local library. Even better, take them — you have toys at home or something like that? Take them to a local children’s hospital.

They need those things, right? If you have a chance to drive for somebody, you have a car, offer to pick someone up or drop someone off. Yeah, it’s going to add another 10 minutes to your commute, but isn’t 10 minutes worth your happiness? Isn’t it worth like, your health? That’s the other thing, when you get a chance to talk a lot about this, there’s so many studies. If you get a chance, go pick up a book, it’s called — it’s not my book or anything like that, I don’t get anything from it, it’s just a really cool book. It’s called Why Kindness is Good for You. It’s written by Dr. David Hamilton, and in it is just massive lists of study after study, talking about how kindness literally makes you live longer.

They did a study with seniors, and they found that seniors who volunteered or did daily acts of kindness had a 40% chance of surviving longer than the exact, their peers who weren’t doing something like that. Studies have showed that a lesser depression, gives cortisol, which is your stress hormone, and it improves your heart rate, it lowers your blood pressure.

It’s a list that goes on and on and on. There is just endless studies that show how much physical benefit there is to kindness. The science behind it is just absolutely astounding, to a point where I’m constantly asking why are we not doing this all the time? Why are you not doing this all the time, right? As a society so obsessed with selfishness when, honestly, kindness is the most selfish thing you could really do, right?

[0:40:12.4] MB: It’s pretty amazing, and it’s so compelling. I mean, the stories themselves are inspiring, but the data is so resounding in favor of being kind to people, and we’ll definitely include that book in the show notes as well. I’m curious, for somebody who is listening right now, and I know we’ve given a lot of different examples and resources for them to check out. What is kind of one starting place, one piece of homework that you would give them?

[0:40:33.2] JW: Well, the one thing I will say is, I mean, we have these bands, we have these bracelets, and I will say, if you want a bracelet, we are going to start having them available. We’ve just been in the early stages right now, so we’ve been usually working with organizations to give their organization tools to these things. If you’re part of an organization with your school, and you want to contact us, and you want to get a bunch of these bracelets, and you want to bring One Kindness as a movement to your organization, please do.

We’ll also start having the ability to sort of order them independently sometime soon. Hopefully in the next couple of months, but really, the one big things is, honestly, right now, if you don’t have reminder bracelets, and the reminder bracelet is key, because you want to be able to anchor that feeling into your life, into your habits, right?

If you don’t have something like that right now, honestly, anything, a rubber band, or simply do this thing where like you wear a rubber band on your left wrist, and then at some point go do an act of kindness, then slip the rubber band to the right. Right? If you want to get those kindness ideas in your inbox, go sign up for the inbox thing. Like I said, we’re not selling this out, there’s not going to be anything that’s not just kindness ideas, and then challenge somebody to do it, because there’s such a social element to it.

You know, start just telling your friend, “Okay, listen, I’m starting a kindness challenge. For the next 21 days, I’m going to be doing a kind act every single day. I want you to join me on this.” Tag them on social media, right? Send them a message on social media. The more people that are going to join you, the stronger what you get out of it actually becomes, because now you’ve got a tribe of people around you all doing the same thing.

Again, if you want, you know, the actual bracelets, they’re nice looking ones, send us a message and we’ll see if we can get some to you.

[0:42:01.3] MB: Well John, this has been amazing. I love your mission, I love what you guys are doing, and I’m really excited about this. I hope that listeners will take this seriously and check it out, you know, sort of perform an act of kindness and see what it means to you and what it feels like. I know that I’m definitely going to do a kindness challenge, and I’m going to challenge everybody at the Science of Success to do one as well. I just wanted to say thank you again, this has been an amazing conversation.

[0:42:23.7] JW: It’s absolutely my pleasure, and thank you for having me on, Matt. This has been such great time, and I really loved chatting about this.

[0:42:30.1] MB: Thank you so much for listening to the Science of Success. Listeners like you are why we do this podcast. The emails and stories we receive from listeners around the globe bring us joy and fuel our mission to unleash human potential. I love to hearing from listeners. If you want to reach out, share your story, or just say “hi”, shoot me an email. My email address is matt@scienceofsuccess.co. I’d love to hear from you and I read and respond to every single listener email.

The greatest compliment you can give us is a referral to a friend, either live or online. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please, leave us an awesome review and subscribe on iTunes. That helps more and more people discover the Science of Success. I get a ton of listeners asking, “Matt, how do you organize and remember all this information?” Because of that we created an amazing free guide for all of our listeners. You can get it for free by texting the word “smarter” to 44222, or by going to scienceofsuccess.co and joining our email list. If you want to get all this incredible information, links, transcripts, everything we talk about on the show, all the research data and much more, you can go to our show notes, which is at our website, scienceofsuccess.co, hit the show notes button at the top. You can get all the resources we discussed on the show today and any of our previous episodes. 

Thanks again, and we’ll see you on the next episode of the Science of Success. 
December 22, 2016 /Lace Gilger
Emotional Intelligence, Mind Expansion

How Two Simple Words Can Massively Shift Your Perspective & Ten Superpowers to Transform Your World with Life is Good Founder John Jacobs

November 10, 2016 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss how our guest went from being “wildly unsuccessful”, sleeping in a used van, to launching a massive brand, the power of simple gratitude during the toughest challenges of our lives, the transformational superpowers that can change your life, the massive perspective shift you can grain from two simple words, and much more with John Jacobs.

John is the co-founder and chief creative optimist for Life is Good as well as the author of Life Is Good: The Book. He and his company have previously been featured on CNN, CNBC, Nightline, Today, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal,and much more.

  • The ten superpowers that can change your life

  • What drove John to find a way to combine art and business to launch an amazing company

  • How Life is Good went from being “wildly unsuccessful”, sleeping in a used van, to launching a massive brand

  • Why its often the people that face the biggest adversity and trauma that embrace the real meaning of “life is good"

  • How Life is Good takes a stand against the negativity in the news media

  • The incredible power of simple gratitude during the toughest challenges of our lives

  • How to focus on optimism without ignoring the negative experiences in your life

  • How the story of one person can transform your experience

  • The Amazing story of how one act of hate created a wave of love

  • How John embarks on his mission to “spread the power of optimism"

  • Even when facing hardest adversity - you can consciously shift your mind to the positive and grow good instead of being consumed by the negative

  • The incredible power of optimism and strategies to become more optimistic

  • Why you should never say you “have to” do something (and what you should say instead)

  • Incredible, simple perspective shift you can get by changing a SINGLE WORD when you find yourself complaining

  • The Rule of “Yes, And,” how it can have a huge impact on your life & unleash your creativity

  • The real depth behind the concept of “life is good”and why its OK to acknowledge the painful parts of your life

  • The importance of taking a few moments to connect with someone

  • Why fun is “part of the main course” and not your dessert

  • How to find simple ways to weave joy into your life

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that). 

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Life is Good Website] Hub of Optimism

  • [Book] Life is Good: The Book by Bert and John Jacobs

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

[0:02:24.5 ] MB: Today we have another exciting guest on the show, John Jacobs. John is the cofounder and chief creative optimist for Life is Good. As well as the author of Life is Good, the book. He and his company had previously been featured on CNN, CNBC, Nightline, Today, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and much more.

John, welcome to the Science of Success.

[0:02:46.9 ] JJ: Matt, thanks so much for having me and Life is Good.

[0:02:50.1 ] MB: We’re very excited to have you on here. So to kind of get started, I’m sure many listeners are familiar with the Life is Good brand, but maybe they don’t know your story. I’d love to kind of hear your story, your background and kind of how you got started.

[0:03:02.4 ] JJ: Sure, let’s see, my brother Bert and I were finishing up college in the early 90’s and we’re looking for a way to combine art and business. We always liked to draw, to write, to create but weren’t really sure what we’re going to do for careers and we saw T-shirts as an accessible way to combine those two things. We had done a little bit of T shirt design back in college. So we designed some shirts, we got out on the streets of Boston. We’re from Boston and still live in the city of Boston; love it.

At the time, we were getting out on high foot traffic areas and just hawking shirts in the street to people coming back from work, anywhere there’s a lot of people and we didn’t find much success early on. Had some fun trying to find the right combination of sayings or art that resonated with people, but I would say we were wildly unsuccessful in that first year and yet we loved — we still felt like in some ways, we’re in college mentally so we said, “Why don’t we buy a used van and start traveling around to college dorms and try selling our shirts in the dorms?”

So we did that, thanks to our brother Ed, we went to an auction, we were able to get a real cheap van and then we started going up and down the east coast and we’d map out this seven week road trips where we would show up at a different campus every night and have a few duffle bags and the back of the van was filled with T shirts and we would just run through the dorms, knocking door to door and asking people if they want to buy our shirts.

Again, we had a lot of fun but we did not have much financial success and we were kind of looking for that right combination. We took a lot of notes, we kept journals on the road so we had an in and an out column for money and we spent virtually nothing other than gas, just getting by and we’d sleep on top of the shirts in the back of the van at the end of the night. And we’d go down as far as Virginia, up as far as Maine and hit every school in the east coast and we ended up doing this for the better part of five years between ’90 and ’94.

The biggest thing that we learned, because we really hit a point where it was becoming clear we didn’t really have a business and we weren’t sustainable financially, we started doing some custom work like for landscape companies or softball teams or drawing cartoons for people, anything to make a little bit of money and we got enough to rent a dive apartment outside of Boston and that would be our home base when we got back from this road trips. Often times, we would throw a keg party when we got home for our friends and put up all our art on the walls and ask them for feedback.

It was kind of our first focus group before we knew what that term meant. One of the conversations we had that repeatedly on the road was about how the media seem to inundate people with negative information and no matter where we went, it seemed like people were talking about the latest disaster or tragedy, fires, murders, disasters and those things happened, a lot of bad things happened in the world but a lot of good things happened too.

We felt like the media wasn’t presenting a balance of those things. We wondered in our long conversations in the van, remember, this is before cellphone time, we had a lot of time to talk about anything and we wondered if we could create something that help people focus on the good that was kind of a rallying cry for optimists. That led to this one drawing of this face, he didn’t have a name at first but he just had a big smile, some sunglasses and a beret.

He was sort of a symbol of free thinking and we may not have the word yet but it’s a symbol of optimism and we have one of those parties when we got home from a long unsuccessful road trip in 1994 and our friends just kept writing notes around this one drawing and one woman wrote, “This guy’s got life figured out.” The next morning when we woke up, we looked at the wall, there was so many comments written either on the wall or little post it’s about this one drawing that we said, “We’ve got to do something with him.”

We kind of distilled all the comments down to this three words, “Life is Good” and those three words really changed our life forever and the very next week, we took our — we printed our firstLife is Good shirts, 48 of them and by the way Matt, I feel imbalanced talking for this long but you encouraged me to do so.

[0:07:51.3 ] MB: Keep on going.

[0:07:53.0 ] JJ: Okay, I’m almost going to breathe. But basically, we printed our first shirts, there were 48 of them, we took them to street fair at Cambridge mass, It really changed our life because we had been doing this street fairs and selling in dorms, hawking in the street for five years but we’d never seen a response like we got that day. The 48 leg is good shirts, were among maybe 15, 20 other designs on the table but that one pile just disappeared in less than an hour.

All different kinds of people from all different walks of life, we had Harley Davidson guy, we had a skateboarder kid, we got a school teacher. All these people, looking around and then picking up that one shirt and buying it from us and we were stunned, we were out of out of Life is Good shirts in an hour and we finally had what we had been looking for, we just didn’t really know what to do with it from that point.

[0:08:49.2 ] MB: You know, the point you made about negativity in the news, I think that’s something that’s so important and we’ve had a couple previous episodes on the show where we’ve talked about that and something I really believe in is just kind of finding a way to sort of tune that out or do something to sort of oppose the fact that when you turn on the TV, it’s a robbery, a fire, X, Y, Z people dying when in reality, there’s so much good in the world as well.

[0:09:15.1 ] JJ: Right. Actually there’s hard data that supports the idea that we’re living in a most peaceful time. You’d never know that if you turn on the news but it’s a fact and people are living longer than ever, there’s a lot of huge, healthy trends out there but unfortunately, the mansion or news media found the formula decades ago that if they scare people, people feel like they hear to watch to protect their lives, protective family. That’s a frustrating thing but we’re trying to do our small part to help people focus on positives.

We really believe that what you focus on grows and all of us have obstacles and opportunities in our lives every day. It’s really a choice we make in the morning, what we’re going to focus our energy on. It doesn’t mean we totally ignore the obstacles or the hardships or any of that. It’s just we’ve learned this lesson in a real deep way from our customers. I mentioned, we didn’t know what to do with this successful shirt when we finally had it, we ended up getting basically doing what we did in the dorms but transferring it to retail, we didn’t know how retail worked and how things got into stores.

But we just started knocking on retail doors and asking if they’d testLife is Good and slowly we got a few small mom and pop shops to do that, they were successful. I remember our first account calling for what you’d called “the reorder” and we had never heard that term before after five or six years in business. But eventually we got some momentum, people started spreading the word to other retailers, and next thing you know we had 10 accounts, a hundred accounts and we had accounts outside of New England and spreading across the country and we got sales reps and we’re learning the nuts and bolts of the business.

But the most impactful and powerful thing that happened was totally unexpected. Yes we got letters from people saying, “Hey, I love your hiking shirt, I love the shirt with this character Jake with his dog, I love my dog, I love gardening, I love doing yoga, playing guitar.” Those kind of letters we started getting but we also started getting letters just as many from people going through great adversity. People facing, losing loved ones, wrestling with cancer, going through chemo and they would say things like their hat helped them stay positive during chemotherapy or we all woreLife is Good shirts to the memorial service for my brother who is a very positive person.

Incredibly moving, letters and emails, we didn’t really know what to do with them as we try to figure out the business. We sort of put them in a drawer, it took us a few years to realize all we have to do is share this letters and they can lift people and we started doing it internally, cut companywide meetings and then eventually we post them on our website and as soon as we shared one story, 10 others would come in and a hundred others would come in because we realized they helped people feel less alone and more of empowered to take on and overcome their own adversity.

Again, I said it earlier but all of us face it whether it’s super dramatic or more day to day challenges. But we all need a lift from each other and one person’s story, particularly someone who has been through something really difficult, if they’re able to focus on gratitude as a foundation and I’m so lucky to have one friend to have a sandwich today to be breathing right now, to go outside, to have a little time with my dog like it’s incredible. We found that people that do face great adversity tend to have a deeper reservoir of gratitude and a real rock solid foundation that we can all learn from.

A lot has come out of those letters and really the direction of our company and the depth of the message have come from listening to our customers and that sort of set us on a certain path to create a kid’s foundation and try to help make life good for a lot of kids who are dealing with some major adversity in their lives.

[0:13:24.7 ] MB: I find it amazing that it’s often the people facing the toughest challenges that this message resonates so deeply with.

[0:13:33.4 ] JJ: That’s right. I think if someone were to see a shirt or hat or anything, those are the things where we’re most known for but if they could look at it and say well that’s easy for somebody to say the pictures of hiking or they might think the name is about sunny days and ice cream and freebies. In reality, we found that on the darkest days, that’s when optimism is most powerful and take the most extreme examples that we’ve encountered since we stated the company.

Yes we’ve had times with the economy has tanked when we’ve been at war, even like 9/11 or more recently again we’re based I Boston and we had the Boston marathon bombing in 2013. In both cases, I’ll just go back to 9/11 for a moment, we kind of froze for a few days because we had a really young company, we had a lot of momentum and this thing went down and we didn’t know if it was appropriate to be sending out boxes of shirts that said Life is Good because it didn’t really feel that way in the days after 9/11.

Then, a quiet woman in our warehouse at a companywide meeting raised her hand and said, why we can’t do a fund raiser to help the victims. We decided to do that and it was our first large scale fund raiser and it was simply putting the word out to our partners and to our team that 100% of the profits would help the victims. That shirt just took off so fast and we ended up raising over $200,000. At the time it was a lot for us and it happened really quickly and that was a great lesson for us that especially in the bad times, people need a light to gravitate toward, they need something positive to rally around.

That led to us creating the Life is Good festivals which were events, usually around some quirky theme like let’s break the world record for most lit jack o lanterns in one place one time. Let’s find the world’s greatest backyard athlete. Usually kind of a light fun theme to get people outdoors together but there was always a series underlying cause. Hey, there’s people out there that don’t find it so easy to see the glass half full to live their lives wide open and embrace newness because they’re dealing with poverty, violence, illness.

There’s a lot of kids that are dealing with that every day of their lives. It was a huge lesson for us to learn and then just to close that loop on the Boston marathon, we had a similar experience where we were, our offices at the time were two blocks from the finish line so we had a lot of our team out there cheering on the runners when the bombs went off, we had a teammate severely injured like shrapnel head to toe, we literally didn’t know if he was going to live to the next day and yet when we visited him the next day, in the hospital, the first thing he said was I’m grateful.

He had seen people killed, he had seen people a lot worse off than him. Most of his wounds healed over time and we were focused on making sure our team was healthy and we had counselors talking to people. Meanwhile, our customers were saying hey, guys, it’s time for another fund raiser shirt. Can you do one? We just spent a few days focused on our team internally and then we said, they’re absolutely right. We made a shirt that the prevalence saying in our city which is a tough old city is Boston strong which is a good saying about resilience but we felt we were witnessing something more than that.

We watched, first of all, EMT’s jumping in the middle of the chaos to save people, to help people and then you broaden the lenses a little bit, you saw runners running an extra mile to give blood. You saw people lending their cellphones, opening up their homes to strangers, you heard about doctors working 50 hour shifts of surgery to help the victims, it was like one act of whatever you want to call it.

Hatred or confusion from two people and that was what the news kept focusing on, they wanted to keep showing the bomb going off and the victims and we’re saying there’s something much bigger happening here and all this love poured in from around Boston and then well beyond Boston, around the world helping, it was compassion coming in from everywhere and the shirt we ended up making simply said Boston on the front with a little heart and one of the O’s on the back, it said, there’s nothing stronger than love.

That shirt we put on our website, we said, we told people 100% of the profits will go to the Boston one fund for the victims and their families and that shirt ending in a matter of five or six weeks sold more than we’ve ever sold of any shirt and we ended up raising over half a million dollars for the one fund. For us, we were proud of how resilient our city was and how quickly we got back to being who we are and trying and move on from this terrible incident but we’ve been more proud, the world’s choice to focus not on hate but on love that they witnessed in the aftermath of the marathon bombing.

[0:19:03.7 ] MB: That’s an incredible story and it’s inspiring that you have served this one act of hatred and violence and it created almost a wave of love and from so many different people.

[0:19:15.7 ] JJ: That’s right.

[0:19:17.9 ] MB: So in the same vein as that, what is the sort of driving purpose of Life is Good?

[0:19:24.6 ] JJ: Our mission is to spread the power of optimism and we really have learned, first, we have to give credit to our mom, Joan Jacobs. She was the number one inspiration for our brand and we grew up in a chaotic little house with eight people, my brother Bert and I are the youngest siblings and we were lucky in a lot of ways because we’re tight family but we definitely dealt with some adversity and some strain and a big part of that was our dad who was an avid outdoorsman, very hands on guy that worked in a machine shop and our mom was more running the circus at home overseeing the six kids and doing all the stuff that a lot of moms did in the 60’s and 70’s and just running the household and they both were in a very serious car accident when Bert and I were in grade school.

Fortunately our mom who had seatbelt on, she just broke her shoulder and she healed. Our dad wasn’t as lucky and he lost the use of his right arm, that new disability for him, his physical limitations, combined with the financial pressure of trying to feed a family of eight, it really led to frustration every day and a lot of yelling in the house and it made for really tense atmosphere at home and yet when we looked back, we think of our mom who was always singing, telling jokes, telling stories, laughing and one thing she would do at the dinner table that really helped us a lot in retrospect, she’d look around at each kid and say, “Tell me something that happened today,” and as simple as that sounds, it changed the energy in the house.

And instead of complaining about anything a kid might complain about; assignment, a teacher, a peer. Instead, we were finding some absurd or positive or funny nugget from the day, just sharing that one thing and it created momentum in the dining room in the house and like I said, it changed the energy in the house and we didn’t probably realize it till we’re 20’s but that was a conscious decision she was making every day, not get pulled in to some of the heavier stuff that was happening in our house and focus our energy on the good.

That helped us give us a bit of a foundation and then the real big one was getting this letters and emails from people that really underscored this notion that even when you’re facing the hardest adversity, there is a way to consciously shift your mind toward the positives and to kind of grow that good in your life instead of getting consumed by the negative and we all know people that are able to do both of those things and meaning well — you know what I mean. It really led to a foundational philosophy for our company that all of us have a choice when we wake up in the morning to focus as I said earlier on obstacles or opportunities.

We just believed that a lot more good comes out of focusing most of our energy on the opportunities and growing those. We’ve seen it come to fruition in our own lives and even more compelling is the stories we received that prove that even if you’re in the worst possible situation, this kind of philosophy gives you a much better chance to get through it and to prosper and to be happy and fulfilled in your life.

[0:23:06.8 ] MB: I think this is a great opportunity to dig in to some of the lessons from Life is Good the book. I know the book talks about sort of 10 super powers that anybody can tap into with optimism obviously being one of the biggest and most important. Tell me a little bit more about that?

[0:23:23.2 ] JJ: Sure. Well we believe that the 10 super powers really came about over time we kept picking up this recurring messages from our customers about what’s most important to them and it ended up being what most companies might call their 10 core values but we think super powers are a lot more fun to say and we feel like unlike bullet speed or herculean strength or X-ray vision, these are super powers accessible to all of us and optimism really enables us as human beings to access this super powers on a daily basis, these are things like authenticity, creativity, gratitude, love, humor.

All of these things when combined lead us to living a more happy and fulfilling life and the book, we ended up devoting one chapter each to a super power and found a way to weave the stories of our customers as well as our own story, as well as a lot of fun top 10 list sand quotes, a lot of playful imagery and some of our best graphics and photos. It’s all combined in there but the real heart of the book is these 10 super powers and really how individuals can bring them to life and sort of tap their power in their everyday life. Each chapter ends with tips for how to access these powers and how to bring them to life on a daily basis.

So it started by request from our publisher, National Geographic. The request was, “Can we do a business book?” And the more we talked about it, we weren’t as excited about that because we feel like a lot of businesses start in the garage or basement and yeah, our origin story is fun but we want to go a lot deeper and as soon as we started talking about the super powers, we knew this is what the basis of the book should be and this is something that we feel like is the most powerful thing we’ve come across and we want to share it with as many people as possible.

[0:25:33.6 ] MB: For somebody that struggles to have an optimistic outlook and for example, I feel like personally I’m kind of naturally sort of a pessimistic person. What do you think that — what are some tips or strategies to sort of shift your perspective?

[0:25:47.4 ] JJ: I think gratitude can play a huge part and it’s starting with — some people do gratitude journals, some people try to weave it in before meals or lunch, special meal a day. I think those are two very tangible ways. One huge one that we’ve learned from our customers is this phrase, “get to”. It came in a form of one letter but it really represents the mindset of a lot of this letters and emails we’ve received, it really is the notion that, let me give you example like at work, at Life is Good, we try as best we can not to say “have to”, “we have to go to a meeting, have to work late, have to work on this assignment.”

We get to do these things because we have jobs and you can apply it to any part of your life, you can say to yourself, I have to go grocery shopping or get to go grocery shopping because I live in the land of abundance that has grocery stores and accessible food. I have to pay the bills or I get to pay the bills because I have a roof over my head. It’s so simple but it’s one word that can shift us from a common and then when I say us, myself included, all of us can fall in to a moment where we feel like we’re burdened, where we’re almost martyrs for fulfilling the responsibilities we have, whether it’s worker’s responsibilities or family or friends that we have to do these things.

We get to do this things because first of all, we’re breathing, we’re alive, let’s seize that opportunity while we’re here. Life is relatively short, let’s remind ourselves that we have a limited time and are we going to choose to bring positive energy to the day because the results tend to be better when we do but this get to phrase has been super powerful and it’s just a tool that is timeless if you put it in that frame, anytime you’re wrestling with something or it feels like a big burden, it’s like well, actually a lot of people don’t have access to a grocery store, a lot of people aren’t paying bills because they don’t have any income and that’s the most basic things that we start to take for granted.

When we find ourselves complaining about things like the weather or traffic, it’s kind of absurd when you compare to what a lot of people — you know how the parts of the globe are dealing with on a daily basis, for severe hunger, poverty, violence and yet sometimes we just need a reset button and that can come in the form of the phrase get to.

[0:28:32.3 ] MB: I love that phrase and that idea, it’s so simple but it creates this incredible perspective shift.

[0:28:38.8 ] JJ: Yup. We love simple phrases, maybe because we’re not capable of anything beyond that, but “yes and” is another one we love and it comes from improv comedy. I don’t know if you're familiar with that one, but with the principle law rule of improv is that you don’t negate the offering of another actor who is on stage because it tends to kill a scene. In order to keep some momentum, whatever your teammates says, you roll with that and you build on it, you augment it.

And we found in brain storming, in doing our best to be creative and finding new ways to spread the power of optimism with new phrases, with new images, “yes and” is a great tool to let ideas breathe a little bit for a minute or two before you get to a stage or a meeting where you’re editing out and you’re narrowing and you’re cutting ideas. You can really benefit from having a more wide open approach and it’s applicable to life as well. Whether it’s with a spouse or a friend or just having conversations that are more yes and’s and building on someone’s idea, instead of that, I think it’s unfortunately kind of hard wired in a lot of maybe all of us human beings.

The fight or flight thing or first thinking about why something won’t work or why it could be a threat. The news again helps build this into people too but if you can release that, try to take on that openness of a five or six year old, a healthy five or six year old who just is open to ideas that says yes to things that wants to explore, that’s a difficult thing for people to retain when we get older. Yet it’s super powerful when it comes to being creative and to building instead of knocking and that’s another favorite simple phrase, don’t knock it, build it and if I get tied back. I am so grateful that you’re giving us a forum here today to talk about what we believe more than anything right now, I think there is a lot of positive media out there, a lot of positive podcast.

Then there’s a lot of shows that just give people place to events and talk about what’s wrong. I think people that spend a lot of energy talked about what’s wrong without transitioning to solutions tend to hurt people’s desire or drive to progress, to grow, to try and do things. I think it’s so healthy that when people are listening to more and more of this content that I don’t mean my content book but what you feature on your show and other podcast or let’s say storytelling hour, things that stories that actually can lift people.

We’ve translated in the last year or two or a lot of the greatest letters we received to stories and video forum and that was incredibly exciting when the book came out. Our book, it gave us a reason to get out on the road and connect with customers to raise over a million dollars for our kid’s foundation with various events over around the country but the most impactful thing we did on that trip, we went coast to coast for 60 days visiting 40 communities and the most impactful thing was visiting the people that had written the most inspiring letters.

Some of them we’d never met in person and I didn’t know if their stories could be better than they were in letter form but there’s a few that just — people who have got incredible response to a couple of boys in Alex and Nick, twin brothers that were born a pound and as I said, had a lot of growing to do and they have — one of the kids has on leg, the other kid is legally blind and they wrote a letter when they were 10 years old and it’s all about how lucky they are and it’s just very moving and very eloquent for 10 year old to write and we share that video as much as we can, there’s another young woman who is now 27.

She wrote to us when she was 11, she was dealing with a prognosis that was — she had bone cancer and it looked like she wasn’t going to live another two years and yet she is alive today but more impressively, when she was 11 and dealing with hat prognosis, she was always cheering people up, anyone who interviewed her and should have brought to our attention because she was always wearing Life is Good hat and literally someone on a radio interview asked about the hat.

Do you understand your prognosis and she said, I think I tended to take things for granted and ever since I heard what’s happening with my body, I don’t, I really realized how lucky I am and I’m trying to savor every day. It was incredible wisdom form an 11 year old and those examples are what fuel our company and just to make us want to spread this message as widely as we can and have people share more and more stories because that seems to be the thing more than anything else that list people and helps people through adversity.

[0:33:59.3 ] MB: For listeners who want to check that out, where can they find some of this videos?

[0:34:03.7 ] JJ: That’s at lifeisgood.com and there’s a button called “discover” and that will bring you to a really fun section of our site that features a lot of this inspiring, uplifting stories.

[0:34:16.8 ] MB: We’ll make sure to include those in the show notes as well. One other thing I wanted to touch on, you have a phrase, “life is not easy, life is not perfect, life is good”. I’d love to just hear your thoughts on that.

[0:34:29.6 ] JJ: Yeah, again, if someone was just introduced to our company and just saw the words “Life is Good”, some might understand the depth of those three words. Some might just say it’s sort of pollyannaish and yet the depth of our brand came from people like our mom and then this stories form people like Alex and Nick and Lindsey that I just mentioned. It really taught us, and that phrase is getting more popular on our product because it does acknowledge and we’ve always tried to acknowledge the darkness in the world, the adversity in the world, the strain that is inevitable in every person’s life at one time or another but that phrase sums it up nicely and it doesn’t mean, when we say Life is Good, it doesn’t mean everything is ice cream and freebies.

It’s a matter of mindset and choice. Okay, I acknowledge that there’s going to be really difficult times in my life and it’s going to be incredibly imperfect just like I am as a person. Whoever says that? Anyone has to look in the mirror and say, “I’ve got so many imperfections, my life has been quite a mix of highs and lows. I’m going through either a good stretch right now or rudely difficult stretch.” But if you step back and look at the whole picture, Life is Good and to us that means if you choose to focus on the good, that’s what will grow.

Acknowledge the painful points, maybe you’re right in the middle one right now and you say, at some point, it’s going to get better, I need to lean on some friends right now, I need to take care of myself, I need to be exercise, I need to talk to friends who understand what I’m going through. Maybe I need to see a professional about it and maybe I just need to recognize a window time where I have a physical ailment or I’m not in a job that I love. It could be any of those things but it’s really a mindset that says.

In the scheme of things, when you look at the whole picture, life itself and my life as a person is going to be good and therefore, that’s going to give me a little more resilience and a little more fire to try to drive through this difficult stretch and that’s what that phrase is all about, it’s acknowledging the hard parts and for your neighbor as well as yourself and saying together, we can make life good.

[0:37:06.1 ] MB: What is one piece of homework that you would give to somebody listening to this episode?

[0:37:11.3 ] JJ: Let’s see. I’m ranging to the super powers in my head and I would say two things. When you get home, if you live with anyone or if you get to work, if you work with any others, try devoting the first five minute to a real human connection with that person. Whether you’re getting home to kids, bring some levities, some humor, some fun. Whether it’s a fun story from your day, or just imitating some bizarre character, sharing a funny movie quote you love or — the point is, a lot of us go from task to ask, whether it’s work at home, and we start to form this checklist and that’s what dominates our minds and if we take just a few minutes to connect with people, all the other stuff gets a lot easier.

If you have to get through a bit of a laundry list or a plan for the weekend or what is the week ahead look like with your team at work or with your family at home or with friends, just spending those moment, that’s why fun and humor are both super powers in the Life is Good world because we found it opens doors, it relaxes people, it unites people, it makes them feel less like robots. Just taking those five minutes, it makes everything run a lot smoother and the other tip or homework I would say is — we really believe in trying.

When you try something new or a little bit outside your comfort zone, you either succeed or you learn. If you take failure off the table like, “Oh no, I don’t want to do that because I might not be good at it,” you inevitably grow and you grow as a person and you feel better that you’ve kind of stretched beyond that comfort zone and it is a chapter we have about courage where it says, “rejection, you can imagine rejection as your best teacher but think of it as your best teacher, as your best trainer.” That’s actually what makes you stronger is — and that, for my brother and I, that biggest period of that was probably the dorms for five years and we just heard “no” and sometimes a polite “no”, sometimes very rude “no”.

But when we’re trying to sell our shirts in the dorms, so many times, thousands of times a week that we realize it didn’t hurt us at all and we just took notes, “Why didn’t they like our shirt?” And ever since then, I feel like that’s been a nice little reference point for us, no matter what stage of the company or stage of our life we were going through, it’s like we’ll shake it off and grow from it and that’s part of the magic of this life is exploring new territory and trying new things. It’s also what keeps relationships, friendships, et cetera fresh is being willing to try new things.

Either together or new hobbies on your own and so, I would encourage listeners to think about, is our hobby whether it’s guitar or writing or knitting, ever wanted to make a little short movie or is it work, is there some project in the garage or is there something you’ve always thought about doing it, “if you had the time”. We really believe in not just finding the time to do things that are, maybe seemed frivolous or very secondary like something related to your personal passion or your hobby.

Something that’s — you might put in a “fun category” and therefore you’re only going to do it on Saturday night or that’s a big thing we talked about in the fun chapters like, fun is not some desert you might get to at the end of your week. It’s part of the main course and if you actually weave it in, you consciously say, “In order to be healthy and to kind of refresh my own sense of optimism and playfulness, I need to look at my calendar and say yeah, I’m going to make time for my cooking, my craft brewing, my writing, drawing, my playing cards with my friends like playing guitar.”

That stuff is a huge replenisher and that’s a big part of what our kid’s foundation actually does is we work with child care providers, there’s a lot of burnout in positions like teacher, counselor, they’re doing such noble work but if they don’t’ take care of themselves, they can’t teach what they don’t — they can’t give what they don’t have, they can’t give joy, they can’t give curiosity, optimism, playfulness if they don’t have those things themselves.

It’s a long answer but I think the most important thing Is looking out for your own health and part of that is not just nutrition and exercise, it’s laughter, it’s fun and whatever brings you that sense of joy, make sure you schedule it into your weekly schedule so that time isn’t going by and you’re falling into this trap of “have to, I have to, I have to” and check this list off every week.

Instead, first of all, I get to do these things even the most mundane things, it’s helpful to look through that lens and then where did I carve out time to do things that just sort of feed your soul, that make you feel more you and make you feel joyful? That stuff is crucial to your own happiness and fulfillment. I don’t think it’s just an American thing or our ambition sometimes pushes us to a level where it’s all about productivity, we found in our business that if people are having fun at work, cracking jokes with each other, throwing the ball around, throwing the Frisbee around.

It actually makes us not just happier but more productive because our brains are more alert, we’re enjoying our time at work and it’s applicable to all of our lives so I’ve said it already, at least twice but the homework to me would be, think about what brings you joy, even if you haven’t done it in 10 years and say, “How do I weave that back into my life?” I’ll give you a personal example, I have always liked, loved movies, always want to make movies, don’t really know how to make movies but a friend of mine with a similar mindset many years ago, we were talking about it, we said, “Let’s just create some forum.”

We created this film festival and asked our friends to make a movie, eight minutes or less and the movies were pretty bad quality the first year but there’s probably two or three gems in there and we do it every two years and the quality has slowly increased but more importantly, we have a deadline, we have a supportive network of friends who want to do something creative and we’re doing it.

It’s over 10 years running and that might be for you like getting together to play music every month with a friend or two or knitting or gardening or whatever that thing is that brings you joy, make sure it’s not an afterthought that’s put away for some day but you actually say to yourself, this is important to my happiness and I’m going to actually schedule it on my calendar and I’ll leave it at that now.

[0:44:40.2 ] MB: That’s an incredible piece of advice and you touched on this once already but tell us again, where can people find you online?

[0:44:46.7 ] JJ: We’re at lifeisgood.com and there is a lot of fun content on there as well as product that we’re really proud of. I would encourage all listeners who sought out your podcast to go to the discover section because there is a really treasure trove of inspiring videos and content that can pick you up and a place to go back to whenever you need a lift.

That’s really what we’re trying to build with our website is a hub of optimism. Where people can come to be lifted and inspired and a community can share stories with each other to keep each other up and optimistic.

[0:45:28.4 ] MB: Well John, this has been a fascinating interview and incredibly inspirational story and obviously your company, Life is Good, it’s so inspirational as well. I just wanted to say thank you very much for being on the show.

[0:45:41.0 ] JJ: Matt, we’re so grateful. Life is Good is, and I am individually. Thanks so much for carving up time for us and I hope anything I shared will be helpful to your listeners and you.

[0:45:53.3 ] MB: Thank you. 


November 10, 2016 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion

What Makes People Turn Evil, Time Paradoxes, and The Power of Heroism with Dr. Philip Zimbardo

September 29, 2016 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion

In this episode we discuss how to create evil in a research laboratory, what makes people “turn evil”, we examine the definition of heroism, dig into the famous Stanford Prison Experiment, explore time paradoxes, and much more with the legendary Dr. Philip Zimbardo. 

Dr. Zimbardo is an internationally recognized scholar, educator, researcher and media personality, winning numerous awards and honors in each of these domains. He has been a Stanford University professor since 1968, where he conducted the famous Stanford Prison Experiment. His career is noted for giving psychology away to the public through his popular PBS-TV series, Discovering Psychology, along with many text and trade books, among his 500+ publications. He was recently president of the American Psychological Association.

We discuss:

  • How to create evil in a research laboratory

  • The different kinds of evil

  • Is there a fixed line between good and evil?

  • What is the definition of heroism (and how its distinct from altruism)

  • How Dr. Z defines evil (and why thats important)

  • What happens when you put only good people in a really bad situation?

  • The inside take on the famous Stanford Prison Experiment

  • How a situation can create an emotional breakdown in a normal, healthy, smart person in less than 36 hours

  • The social processes that can grease the slippery slope of evil

  • How normal people can transform into monsters

  • The substantial risks of dehumanization

  • The power of the heroic imagination

  • How teachers can bring the best out in their students

  • The time paradox and how we live with vastly different time perspectives

  • How conflicts derive from people’s differing time perspectives

If you want to hear from a titan of psychology about the inner workings of the human mind - listen to this episode! 

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions on how to do that).

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

  • [Explanation] Milgram Experiment

  • [Explanation] Stanford Prison Experiment

  • [Movie Trailer] Stanford Prison Experiment

  • [Amazon Movie Stream] Stanford Prison Experiment

  • [Book] The Time Paradox by Philip Zimbardo and John Boyd Ph.D.

  • [Website] Time Paradox Site

  • [Book] The Lucifer Effect by Philip Zimbardo

  • [Book] The Time Cure by Philip Zimbardo, Richard Sword, and Rosemary Sword

  • [TEDTalk] The Psychology of Evil by Philip Zimbardo

  • [TEDTalk] The Psychology of Time by Philip Zimbardo

  • [Video] The Heroic Imagination Project

  • [Website] The Heroic Imagination Project

  • [Email] admin@heroicimagination.com

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

Today, we have a titan of psychology on the podcast, Dr. Philip Zimbardo. Dr. Z is an internationally recognized scholar, educator, researcher, and media personality, winning numerous awards and honors in each of these domains. He has been at Stanford University, as a professor since 1968, where he conducted the famous Stanford Prison Experiment. His career is noted for giving psychology a way to the public through his popular PBS TV series, ‘Discovering Psychology’, along with many texts and trade books among his 300 publications. He was recently president of the American Psychology Association. Dr. Z, welcome to the Science of Success.

Dr. Z:	I’m happy to be here, Matt, and happy to share some ideas with your listeners.

Matt:	Well, we’re so excited to have you on here. I know we’re a little bit time constrained today, so let’s just jump right in. Starting with the idea of the psychology of evil. Tell me about what makes people go wrong. What makes people turn evil?

Dr. Z:	Well, I’ve been studying evil in a curious way by creating it in research laboratories. I was interested in this topic since I was a little kid. I grew up in poverty, in the ghetto, in the South Bronx of New York, and if you grow up in any ghetto, there are always men who are there—evil men—to corrupt kids, getting them to do criminal things for money: stealing, selling drugs, taking drugs, getting girls to sell their bodies for money. Some of my friends gave into that temptation and other kids didn’t. So, evil, again, as we know from the Bible, it’s all about giving in or resisting temptation. So, as a kid I was curious as to: What’s the difference between kids who gave into this temptation, and ended up doing bad things—some of then went to jail—and kids like me, and other friends, who didn’t? My primitive answer, when I was seven years old, was that maybe it had to do with having a strong mother who had a moral compass saying, “This is right; this is wrong,” and also showed unconditional love. Then, when I became a psychologist I thought, well, it’s not that simple because there are three kinds of evil. There’s evil, which is dispositional in people. That’s namely bad apples. There are people who are psychopaths who don’t feel emotion, who can hurt others with no remorse. We see this in a lot of the high school shooters. Then, there’s the evil of situations. That is, there are some situations that encourage, provoke, stimulate people to do bad things, and that’s situational evil. That’s where my prison study comes in, and also the earliest study—I’ll mention briefly to your listeners—by Stanley Milgram about blind obedience to authority. But then we had to recognize a third kind of evil, which is systemic evil, namely that the evil created by legal, political, economic forces. This is the bad barrel makers. So it’s bad apples, bad barrels, and bad barrel makers. Systemic evil is: war, terrorism, slave labor, sex trafficking. So, there’s many examples. That’s evil at the top, and that’s the worst kind of evil because it’s evil to make money.

Matt:	So, is there a fixed line between good and evil, or is it permeable?

Dr. Z:	That’s a really good question. It’s very permeable, and it varies historically; it varies with different cultures, and it’s culturally relevant, so that if you are a suicide bomber in the Mid-East, in Palestine, and your job is to blow up innocent women and children with the assumption that you will then be a hero, you’ll be sitting at the right hand of Allah, that’s one definition of hero, but you are a villain to the opposition. So, really there has to be a higher order definition. It can’t be localized. It can’t be local hero, so there really has to be an international sense that nothing that destroys human life, except in a military battle of soldiers against soldiers, can qualify as heroism. 

Matt:	So, how would you define evil, or how would you define heroism?

Dr. Z:	Okay. Well, heroism is easier. Heroism is acting to help others in need, and/or acting to support a moral cause by standing up; speaking out; taking action. Doing so, aware that there could be a risk and a personal cost. So, that’s how heroism differs from altruism. In altruism there’s not personal cost. I give money to a charity; I give blood to a blood bank; it’s really not a cost, so that, heroism involves a knowing risk. In the extreme it’s loss of life or a limb, but for whistle blowers, for example, it’s often loss of a job, or loss of promotion. Evil is behaving in ways that violate human dignity; that degrade/diminish, the quality of life for other people in various ways.

Matt:	One of the landmark findings of the Stanford Prison Experiment was the power of institutions to impact human behavior. Tell me a little bit more about that.

Dr. Z:	As I said earlier, in the mid ‘60s, Stanley Milgram, when he was young professor at Yale University, did the really dramatic studies on obedience to authority in which he tested a thousand people over a number of years—mostly men, but he also showed it’s true with women—who are put in this situation where they believed they were acting as teachers to help their student improve by punishing your student when he made errors. Punishment was by delivering electric shocks on a prearranged schedule on a big electric stimulator. It started at 15 volts, and it increased by 15 volts along 30 switches. When it got in the hundreds, the student, who was actually a confederate in another room—meaning working with the experimenter—began to scream and yell, and as it got worse and worse he screamed louder and louder, and said...begged to let them stop it. In every case the subjects...the teachers...the people roleplaying teachers complained, they dissented, but the experimenter, acting as the ultimate authority in the white lab coat, kept putting pressure on them to keep going. The question is: Would you go up to 450 volts of electric shock to another person at the command of an authority? When this study was presented to 40 psychiatrists at the Yale Medical School their answer was that only 1% would do that because that’s psychopathic behavior, and in fact, what Milgram found was 2 of every 3 American citizens in his research went all the way. So, that was shocking and startling. In my analysis, it’s very rare somebody tells you to do a bad thing, other than the evil guys in the Bronx. You usually...you’re playing a role. You’re in a situation, you see what other people are doing, and then there’s always semantic distortion that is, nobody does evil, people are doing good. So again, if you’re with ISIS, you’re doing the Lord’s work, or you’re doing Allah’s...you’re doing what they believe the Quran says. 

What I wanted to do in creating the Stanford Prison Study is to ask the question: What happens when you put only good people in a really bad situation? Namely, a simulated prison, which simulates the psychology of American prison with power, and dominance, and demeaning; making prisoners feel powerless and helpless. Would the goodness of the people change the badness of the situation, or does such powerful situations even come to corrupt good people? Sadly, the answer was: Humanity 0, Evil 1. We lost that battle because almost everyone in my study, and these were college students from all over the United States recruited by an ad in the Palo Alto Newspaper: Wanted college students for study of prison life that lasts up to two weeks. 75 people answered the ad. We interviewed them; gave them personality tests. We picked two dozen. The most normal, healthy—that’s really important—and smart, educated college students. We randomly assigned them by a flip of the coin. Half would be guards, half would be prisoners. Then, we began our experiment, and what happened was initially, on day one, nothing. Remember, it’s 1971. Students are antiwar activists. Students are civil rights activists. Students hate the police because policemen came on many college campuses when students were protesting against the war in Vietnam. So, nobody wanted to be a guard, and that’s really important, but they’re in the guard uniform, they have the role, they have to do it. What happened was, on day two the prisoners revolted. That is, they didn’t want to be dehumanized. The prisoners had smocks on with...instead of a name they had they only became a number as happens in prisons. What the guards did was, call in all the guards on all the shifts. There were three guards and each of three eight hour shifts, and standby guard. They broke down the doors that the prisoners had barricaded, and at that point they said, “These are dangerous prisoners,” and suddenly everything changed. Now, the guards have to demonstrate to the prisoners that they have power and the prisoners have none. Every day thereafter, they ramped up the abuse...the degradation, and in 36 hours the first prisoner had an emotional breakdown...in an experiment, knowing it’s an experiment, and each day thereafter another prisoner broke down. So, the study was going to go for two weeks, but I ended it after six days because it was out of control. We had proved our point. Evil situations can corrupt the best and brightest of us.

Matt:	That’s fascinating, and I know that that experiment’s a landmark study in psychology.

Dr. Z:	You know, now it’s a Hollywood movie. It’s a very good Hollywood movie that just opened last year...I mean, this year. It was premiered at Sundance in 2015, last year, and it won many awards for the best science into film, best editing, best screenplay, and brilliant acting by two dozen young actors. The guy who played me, Billy Crudup, he was in the movie, ‘Almost Famous’, and he’s a very good rendition of me. A little more handsome, but otherwise a good sub.

Matt:	That’s great. We’ll definitely include in the show notes a link to that movie so everybody can check it out.

Dr. Z:	Yeah, there’s a great...there’s actually a great two minute trailer.

Matt:	Perfect. Well, we’ll link all that stuff up in the show notes. So, tell me about...looking more, kind of zooming out at the systemic causes of evil, what are some of the social processes that grease, as you call it, the slippery slope of evil?

Dr. Z:	There’s much research, not only by me, but by many other people, which outlines: What are the specific social psychological processes that can make somebody step across that line between good and evil? There’s research that shows that it’s the majority of people who can be seduced; can be corrupted. It’s really the minority who are able resist the group pressure. So, any situation you’re in where the situation makes you feel anonymous, nobody knows who you are, and really nobody cares to know, makes it easier for you to do evil if that’s a possibility: to cheat, to lie, to steal. Diffusion of responsibility: If you’re in a group and the usual personal responsibility that you feel for your action now gets diffused; gets spread thinly. So, now the group begins to, for example, not help somebody in distress. Normally, you would be a Good Samaritan, but now your responsibility is diffused and you don’t help. There are many, many situations, and as I said, it’s anonymity, diffusion of responsibility, moral disengagement. There are also times when we are very moral, but in a particular situation we say, “Well, this is different.” So, we can suspend our usual of morality or conscious. Again, being in a group where the group norm is either to do nothing, or to do things which favor your group against some other group, but dehumanization is, for me, the most extreme. Namely, thinking about...so, that’s why we say, “It’s in the imagination.” Thinking about someone else, or some other group, as less than human, as vermin, as animals, as worthless. Once you have that thought in mind. Once you put a label on other people, then there’s no limit to what you can do. Now, I think, sadly, we’re seeing this recently in all of the police shootings of black men throughout the country, where deep down it’s a threat. Deep down they believe that black men are...they...many people in society, and police especially, who are weaponized, believe that black men pose a danger. So, when any black man is in a situation where there’s any ambiguity, the policeman will err in the direction of assuming something negative. Assuming the person is armed, or assuming the person will take action against them, and therefore what they are seeing is, they are defending their life by shooting first. In many cases the black man—the African American man or boy—had no weapon, was innocent, except he was not innocent of being black in the eyes of the white policemen.

Matt:	So, we’ve touched on evil, and how a situation, or social processes, can turn somebody, a normal, healthy, smart person, into someone that’s capable of evil, especially in the context of police shootings, which you were just referencing. I know something that’s incredibly important to you, and now is a big focus, is the psychology of heroism and the idea of the heroic imagination. Tell me a little bit about that.

Dr. Z:	Yes. Well, let me help with that transition in that. After I did the Stanford Prison Study, way back in 1971, I wrote a few articles. I never wrote a book about it because, for me, it was just a nice demonstration of the power of situations, and I moved on. I began to study shyness as a self-imposed psychological prison. Nobody had studied shyness in adolescents, or adults, before I did in 1972. Then, I began to study the psychology of time perspective, because in that week all our sense of time got distorted because...for the prisoners, and for me and my staff of graduate students—Craig Haney, Curt Banks, David Jaffe—each eight hour guard shift began to feel like a full day. In our prison there were no clocks. There were no watches. There was no daylight or nightlight, and so I began to study how people lived in different time zones, and past, present, and future. It was only after I got involved in defending an American prison guard in Abu Ghraib Prison scandal that I then decided to write a book about it. I wrote a book called, ‘The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil,’ and it’s become a classic. It’s translated now in 25 different languages. So, I would put that on the reading lists of your listeners. But the other thing, in chapter 16, I raised, for the first time, the question of everyday heroes. I say that in all the evil situations—Abu Ghraib, and Stanford Study, and the Milgram Study—and then I outline all of the research done on psychology of evil, and conformity. There’s always a minority—5%, 10%, 20%, never more than 30%—who resist the power of the situation. I raised the issue: Maybe we can think of them as heroes. Not traditional heroes. Not military heroes who are willing to die in battle to save their buddies, but these are people who, in any given situation, are able to step back, identify what’s happening and make a decision not to go along with the group, and they’re willing to risk being ostracized, or dismissed, from the group. So, that’s the first time I raised the question about the nature of heroism, and shortly after I gave a Ted Talk, in 2008...a Ted Talk on my journey from evil to heroism, and many people came up afterwards, including Pier Omidyar, the guy who started eBay, and he said, “You know, you have to create a nonprofit foundation to study this concept of everyday heroism. It’s really new. Nobody’s ever thought about it.” So, I did. So, since 2008 I have a nonprofit organization in San Francisco called, ‘The Heroic Imagination Project’, short HIP, h-i-p, because the idea is it all starts in the mind...the human imagination. Thinking of yourself as evil, thinking of yourself as someone who is willing to stand up, stand out, speak out, in all the challenging situations in your life, in your family, in your school, in your work, in your community, and ultimately in your nation. So, we started doing research. Eight years ago there was almost no research on heroism, which is really curious. In fact, the word ‘hero’ and ‘heroism’ does not exist in any psychology textbook. It does not exist in the positive psychology manual because it’s not a human virtue, it’s a civic action. So, this is [INAUDIBLE:  0:20:00], so we began to do research, and then I developed, with my education team, a series of educational lessons, or modules, each organized around a social psychological theme like transforming passive bystanders into active heroes; transforming a fixed static mindset into a dynamic gross mindset; transforming prejudice and discrimination into understanding and acceptance. So, we developed six of these lessons in great detail and great length, and what’s exciting about them is really educate...revolution education. They’re organized around provocative videos. So, teachers then don’t give lectures at all. We give teachers a script. Teachers are like athletic coaches; the students are really their team, and their goal is: bring out the best in each of your team members. Now, students work in pairs, ideally a boy and a girl as a team so when the teacher asks a question it’s not that everybody raises their hand to answer, it’s that each team talks about how they would respond. Sometimes they write down their answers. Sometimes the teacher calls on the team to do this. And each lesson goes two to three hours, and their feedback is: it’s exciting for the teachers and exciting for the students, but the two most important things are: understanding these principles of social psychology and how they can be put into action. That means that we are training every student to be a potential social change agent; to use knowledge to make the world better, not simply to make you smarter. This is the feedback we’re getting around the world. So, our program is in Hungary, and Poland, and Italy, in Bali, and Geelong, Australia, and Flint, Michigan, and in many community colleges in Oregon and in Southern California. We hope to spread it even further. 

Matt:	So, for someone that’s listening to this podcast right now, what would be a way that they could apply the knowledge of psychology to make themselves better?

Dr. Z:	Well, that’s...you can go on our website, www.heroicimagination.com, and I think we have some advice, some recommendations. Reading ‘The Lucifer Effect’ would also be a start, but it’s unfortunately... I really want to build a volunteer core. I’m good at almost everything except raising money. I have not been able to raise money. I give a huge amount of money to my hero project, and I physically...I do the training, so part of our model is: in order to deliver these lessons, you license them for a fee. For let’s say, three years either a school, a city, or even a whole nation, and then I have been doing most of the training. I got to Budapest. I go to Warsaw. I go to Bali. But I’m now 83 years old and I’m not as mobile as I used to be, so I have to raise money in order to build out our team, in order to get volunteers to learn to be trained to deliver this material. I think if they’re interested in being involved, I think if you just put ‘admin’, a-d-m-i-n, @heroicimagination.com, my assistant will try to answer them and see how we can create a volunteer core. 

Matt:	That’s very exciting. You touched on this in the backstory behind how you got involved with creating the Heroic Imagination Project, tell me a little bit about the idea of time paradoxes and the different time zones that people live in.

Dr. Z:	Yeah. So, as I said, in between the Stanford Prison Study and creating Heroes, I stopped out and I started on this...trying to understand: how is it that people live in different time zones and are typically totally unaware that they do? Here, again, it started with very personal...my father, who was a brilliant man, who never had any education, second generation Sicilian, was a total, what we call, ‘present hedonist’. He lived for the present moment. He was a musician. He was a party guy. He loved to dance. He loved to gamble. This was great when he was single, but it’s not great when he has a family of four...of four kids and a wife to take care of, but he didn’t care. He was always happy. He was out of work often. We were on home relief—they used to call it in those days. He used get me crazy because I was...I realized the only way to get out of poverty is by planning, or having a program, or having an agenda to do things constructively. He live for the moment. He lived for the day. So, an amazing example is that without any education at all he made a television set from a wiring diagram in 1947. Television was invented when? 1946. A year before. He learned how to do wiring...I mean, he built it himself. Not just read the plans. He learned wiring. He learned how to read schematics from a Puerto Rican radio store man who had a radio store in the tenement building we lived in, and he built a set in 1947. I remember charging my friends, I think, 25 cents to watch the World Series. I think it was Yankees against the Dodgers, and everybody said, “We want one.” I said, “Dad, this is our break. We’ll help you. Everybody... It’s a new thing.” In fact, even more brilliantly—equally brilliant—they only had little eight inch screens, so he got a parabolic mirror, a huge mirror, so that you could expand the view of the screen. My father said, “No, I only did one. It was a challenge, I met it. That’s it. I don’t want to bother doing more.” So, here’s a case where you’re poor, you have an invention that everybody wants, you can make money on it... I’m pressing because I’m now totally future oriented, and he’s resisting because he lives in the moment. That really started me always thinking as a kid and later on: how is that people can have such different time zones and be unaware of the other? So, I developed a skill called a ‘Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory’, a ZTPI, which was published, and it’s the most widely used scale that measures differences in time perspective. Then I wrote a book called, ‘The Time Paradox’ and if your listeners go on the web, www.thetimeparadox.com, there is this scale, and if they take it, it scores it immediately, and it tells you which of the five time zones you are in. Are you future oriented like I was? Are you a present hedonist? Or you live in the past. Do you live in a positive past, or a negative past? Are you a present fatalist? Do you believe that it doesn’t pay to plan the future? Nothing works out. Fate is against you. These are five of the scales that we have developed, and since then, again, it’s been translated in dozens of languages around the world. And people using it in research, and education, even in finance, are finding enormous benefits of using it. 

Lastly, for those in your audience who are interested in therapy, I wrote a book called, ‘The Time Cure’ where we used the ideas in ‘The Time Paradox’ as a way to treat people with PTSD—veterans, women who have been sexually abused, people who’ve been in natural disasters, or fatal car accidents. We show how our very simple didactic treatment literally can cure PTSD. The book is called, ‘The Time Cure’. So, there’s a lot of reading for your listeners.

Matt:	That’s great. We love to have lots of resources for people to dig in who want to do homework after the show and learn a lot more. One of the funny stories that I really like that you tell about time paradox is the idea, or the concept, that Sicilian dialect in Italy has no future tense. Can you tell that story?

Dr. Z:	Yes, I’m Sicilian. I am Sicilian on my grandmother’s side and my grandfather’s side. I’m third generation. My grandparents came here around the turn of the century, and again, none of them were educated, and in general, one of the sad things about Sicily is: people do not value education as much as they do in Asian countries; as much as the Jewish people do. The big problem has always been believing that you get what you want not by being smart, but by having good connections. This is the enduring curse of the Mafia, but it’s also political connections corruption. So, this is what I’ve always had to oppose. In fact, as a sidebar, I set up a foundation in Sicily, in the cities where my grandparents came from. And I have a colleague, Steve Luczo, who’s the head of Seagate Technology, whose grandmother came from Corleone; my grandparents came from Cammarata. So, together we put in money...we raised money, and every year we give 20 scholarships for high school kids in both of those towns to go to Sicilian colleges, and we’re slowly changing...the idea is that it really matters what you know even more than who you know. One of the problems then, in this culture where people live for the moment, that is they love good food, good wine, lots of babies, good sex, good lifestyle is really important—partying, dancing—that when I gave a talk recently, there was a poet in the audience who came up afterward and said, “Look, I’m a poet. I live with words, and it’s not until I heard you talk that I realized that in Sicilian dialect there is no term for the future. There’s a term ‘was’, there’s a term ‘is’, there’s no ‘will be’. It doesn’t exist.” I said, “Really?” He said, “Now I understand why things never get done, because nobody ever plans for the future, and nobody ever makes reservations for something that’s going to happen more than a few hours in the future.” I thought: this is very funny, but really, it’s funny on one side, but it also means it limits the educational growth, but also the economic growth, of a nation.

Matt:	So, how do conflicts derive from differences in people’s time perspectives?

Dr. Z:	If you don’t understand somebody else that lives in a different time zone, you make misattributions. So, the easy attribution: My father was...he’s lazy, and his attribution of me could have been: he’s excessive; he’s a nerd; he only cares about money. So, again, in every family, people live in different time zones. One of the things we argue is, it’s really important for the whole family to take our Time Scale test, as I said, online, and then begin to talk it through great conversation, knowing what your time zone is, what other people’s time...and then we also tell you what is ideal. So, an ideal balanced time zone...time profile is to be moderately high on future. Not excessively high because then you become a workaholic, but high on past positive, meaning when you think about the past you bring up all the good memories, all the good things that happened. Then, to be moderate on present hedonism, meaning that you select things that are pleasurable as a reward for when you succeed in something on your to-do list. Past negative and present fatalism always has to be low because those are...they detract from the human condition. A balanced time perspective...lots of people now are using that as a core to say, “I’m past positive, moderately high future, and moderate present hedonism, and low on past negative, present fatalism.” That’s what’s called ‘balanced time perspective, BTP. There’s now lots of research that shows people having this balanced time perspective are happier, more successful academically, more successful in business, and this what we want to strive for. 

Matt:	How do we change our time perspective?

Dr. Z:	Well, at this point, I’m going to tell you, you have to read the book. In ‘The Time Paradox’ we have whole chapters on: if you want to be more present oriented this is what you have to do. If you want to be more future oriented this is what you have to do. Right now I am running out of time. I have a lecture to prepare for tomorrow. We’re starting a Zimbardo college in China, and my China representative, Jenny Mars, is flying in today from Shanghai for us to begin to plan courses for our Zimbardo College in Shanghai. 

Matt:	Perfect. Well, I know you’ve got to go, and you’ve got a ton of fascinating projects and initiatives out there, which we will have a very detailed show notes where we go through and list everything that Dr. Z listed from books, to movies, to Ted Talks, and things about the Heroic Imagination Project. So, Dr. Z, it’s been an honor to have you on the Science of Success, and I just wanted to say, thank you so much.

Dr. Z:	Thank you. The other thing I just noticed checking out my Ted Talk: four million two hundred fifty thousand people have seen that in 8 years. That’s a staggering number. Five million...five and a quarter million people have seen that 20 minute talk.

Matt:	That’s pretty amazing. For listeners who haven’t we’ll link it in the show notes so you can check it out, but again, Dr. Z thank you so much. We’ve really enjoyed having you on here.

Dr. Z:	Any time. Take Care. Be well. Ciao.

Matt:	Ciao. 

September 29, 2016 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion

How a Judge Literally Rolling Dice Could Get You Double The Jail Time - The Anchoring Effect

July 20, 2016 by Lace Gilger in Mind Expansion, Decision Making

In this episode we are going to talk about how random dice rolls can influence judges to give people longer jail sentences, how so-called experts are massively influenced by completely random numbers – even when they explicitly deny it – and how you can better understand this crazy phenomenon – the Anchoring Effect.

As Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman puts it in his book Thinking Fast and Slow: 
"The main moral of priming research is that our thoughts and our behavior are influenced, much more than we know or want, by the environment of the moment."

Arbitrary numbers and anchors can have huge implications for your decisions without you even realizing it and this all operates at a subconscious level beyond your conscious experience.
 
This episode is going to focus on drilling down and understanding a specific cognitive bias – a mental model – to help you start building a toolkit of mental models that will enable you to better understand reality.
 
Anchoring bias – along with Priming and Framing, which we have covered in previous episodes – are all cognitive biases that you want to know, understand, and be aware of – so that you can add them to your mental toolbox and make better decisions.

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions how to do that!).  

SHOW NOTES, LINKS, & RESEARCH

The specific research studies we cite are located within the book Thinking Fast & Slow.

  • [Book] Thinking, Fast and Slow Paperback by Daniel Kahneman (see here).

  • [Book] Think Twice: Harnessing the Power of Counterintuition by Michael J. Mauboussin (see here).

  • [Science of Success Episode] How This Simple Change In Wording Made 50% of Doctors Choose a More Dangerous Medical Procedure (see here).

  • [Science of Success Episode] This Powerful Factor Controls Your Decisions And 86% of People Have No Idea It Exists (see here).

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

In this episode, we’re going to drill down and understand a specific cognitive bias to help you start building a mental toolkit. Remember that concept we talked about in the interviews with Shane Parish of Farnham Street, and the author and global financial strategist Michael Knobison [?] Both of them are experts in human thinking and decision making, and they both shared the same concept, the same idea. That what we should focus on to become smarter, to build better minds and make better decisions it to build a toolkit of mental models. Of models of reality that we can use to understand ourselves, understand our thinking, and understand the world around us. If you want to dig around more in that concept, check out those two interviews. They’re great interviews - tons of great information in there. But today we’re going to focus on a specific mental model. A specific cognitive bias. The anchoring bias. 

Along with priming and framing, which we’ve covered in previous episodes. These are all ways in which the environment can substantially shape your decision making at a subconscious level. It’s a cognitive bias that you want to be aware of to know, to understand, so that you can add it to your mental toolbox so that you can make better decisions and so that you don’t fall prey, like so many people do, to these dangerous cognitive biases. 

I wanted to open up with a quote from the book Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. We’ve cited this in a number of other episodes, it’s an amazing book, highly recommend getting into it. But, before you do, there’s other, better books to start with because it’s such a dense book. Amazing information in there. But we talked about in the priming episode some other books that are better to start with if you really want to kind of begin to get a grasp of psychology and how it controls and rules the world around us. Anyway, here’s the quote. 

QUOTE: “The phenomenon we were studying is so common and so important in the everyday world that you should know its name. It is an anchoring effect. It occurs when people consider a particular value from an unknown quality, before estimating that quantity. What happens is one of the most reliable and robust results of experimental psychology. The estimates stay close to the number that people considered, hence the image of an anchor. If you were asked whether Ghandi was more than 114 years old when he died, you will end up with a much higher estimate of is age at death than you would if the anchoring question referred to his death at age 35.” End quote. 

Let’s dig into that a little bit.

Anchoring is the phenomenon where totally random or arbitrary numbers can substantially impact our decision making. Can substantially change the values that we assign to things, and the numbers that we select. He cites the example of Gandhi. If you - and they conducted this research study. They asked people whether Gandhi was more than 114 years old when he died. They also asked people whether Gandhi was younger than age 35 when he died. If you ask that question, what happens - and you’re probably already doing this yourself. What happens is you take that number, which is called the anchor, and then you start adjusting back from that number to something that is more reasonable. We all know that Gandhi was not 114. We also know that he was older than 35 when he died. But people who start adjusting, and this is the crux of the anchoring bias, typically people will move away from the anchor until they get to a point of uncertainty. Until they get to a point or a place where they’re not sure if they should keep moving the anchor any further. The problem is - that’s where they stop. That’s where they kind of place their guess. But typically they don’t go far enough. So the anchor has a substantial impact on their guess, or on the number, or on the value they associate to this. And we’ll get into some real world implications of this.

To give you another illustration of the anchoring effect. Amos Tversky conducted a study where they had a rigged Wheel of Fortune. It would only ever either go to 10, or 65. Now, it had zero to 100 on there, but it was rigged to only ever stop at one of those two numbers. What they would do is stand in front of a small group of people, ask them to write down the number when the wheel stopped. Again, the number would either be 10 or 65. Then they asked them two specific questions. Is the percentage of African nations among UN members larger or smaller than the number you just wrote. The next question: What is your best guess of the percentage of African nations in the United Nations? Now, as they point out, spinning that Wheel of Fortune has no impact on the number of African nations in the United Nations, it provides no valuable information. But it had a substantial impact on respondents and how they felt and how they thought about the second question that they were asked. Specifically, the average estimate of those who saw the number 10, was the 25% of the United Nations were African Nations. However, those who saw the number 65 estimated that 45% of the United Nations were comprised with African Nations. The key point here is that this totally innocuous, totally random number, created a substantial difference in the way that people perceived and tried to understand this phenomenon. We’re going to look at some other examples of how the anchoring bias can dramatically shape our decisions. 

But before we dig into that, I wanted to talk about a couple other features of the anchoring bias. A couple other ways to think about and understand how the anchoring bias functions. There’s a study conducted by Nick Epley and Tom Gilovich that found evidence that when they expose people to an anchor and have them shake their heads, they were less likely to have the anchor influence them. It was almost as if, at a subconscious level, they were rejecting the anchor. So they moved further away from the anchor and made better and more accurate decisions than either people who did nothing, or people who nodded their head in agreement which actually showed an enhance anchoring effect. But the more fascinating finding of the Epley and Gilovich study is that they confirmed that adjusting away from an anchor is an effortful process. It’s something that depletes our mental resources. And we’ve talked about this before. We’ve talked about willpower, we’ve talked about decision fatigue. And we go in-depth in that in our interview with Peter Shallard about success predictors. It’s a great episode if you haven’t listened to it. I would highly recommend listening to that episode because we really talk a lot about replenish willpower, how it works, how decision fatigue functions, and much more. But one of the fascinating things is that conscious adjustments away from an actor take willpower and take decision-making power. So, if we’re in a state of mental fatigue, we’re more likely to be influenced by anchors. They’re more likely to shape our decisions and make us make poor decisions.

The next fascinating thing about the anchoring bias is that it can actually be measured, unlike many psychological phenomenon, the anchoring bias because it deals with numbers, has a measurable effect and can often be quite literally, quantified. As Kahneman puts it, QUOTE: “Many psychological phenomena can be demonstrated experimentally. But few can actually be measured. The effect of anchors is an exception. Anchoring can be measured, and it is an impressively large effect.” End quote. And there’s a really good study demonstrates how they measure the anchoring effect, and it also shows us how even experts can be influenced substantially by anchors, and how anchors can influence us at a subconscious level, even when we’re not aware of them. Even to the point where experts will literally deny that the anchor had any impact on their decision making. And in an experience that was conducted with real estate agents. The agents were given an opportunity to assess the value of a house that was actually on the market. They visited the house and studied comprehensive amount of information that included an asking price. The trick here is that half of the agents saw an asking price that was substantially higher than the list price. The other half saw an asking price that was substantially lower. Each agent was asked to give an opinion about a reasonable buying price for the house, and the lowest possible price they’d be willing to sell the house if they were the owner. What they found out is, and again, anchoring is a measurable effect. Agents who were shown the low price, were 41% lower than the actual price of the house. Agents who had been shown a high price, were 41% higher. Again, this is average. So the average anchoring effect was 41%. The interesting thing is that agents who asked for the list price had any impact on their judgement. The vast majority of them took pride in their ability to ignore the list price and determine the value the home based on other factors. 

So, not only was there a substantial anchoring effect for these experts, but they were consciously unaware of the impact that anchoring had on them. They then conducted a follow-up study with business school students where they did the same thing. The fascinating outcome was that business school students also had a 48% anchoring effect. The crazy thing is that the difference between how the anchor affected the experts, influenced their decisions by a 41% margin, versus total laymen who had a 48% difference. Those are pretty close together. The detailed expertise that these agents had was not enough to overcome the anchoring bias. The fact that they said it had no impact on their decision, despite the fact that a group of totally uneducated people about the real estate space specifically had almost the same margin of error as the real estate agents. The only difference between the two studies was that the business school students conceded the fact that the anchor price substantially impacted their decision making. 

So, in many ways, expertise was more dangerous in this context because the business school students, knowing they were not experts, were willing to admit that the anchor had influenced their pricing. But the experts themselves were not willing to admit that. And it’s not even that they were trying to hide that fact. They were not consciously aware of the fact that the anchor had influenced them. That’s why anchoring can be so dangerous. It’s something that we’re often not aware of at a conscious level. It’s just like the priming effect. It’s just like the framing effect. These cognitive biases take place subconsciously. We have to try really hard - we have to focus in. We have to understand them deeply. We have to understand our own thinking and be aware of all of them so that we can catch ourselves, and so that we can stop having things like anchoring influence our decision making. 

Another fascinating component of the anchoring bias is that totally random anchors can have a substantial impact on people’s perceptions. We talked about that when we talked about the number of African nations in the United Nations. But this is even more staggering. There’s a study about judges sentencing people. And I’m going to quote from Kahneman here, because he perfectly describes this experiment. 

QUOTE: “The power of random anchors has been demonstrated in some unsettling ways. German judges with an average of more than 15 years of experience on the bench, first read a description of a women who had been caught shoplifting. Then, rolled a pair of dice that were loaded so every role resulted in either a three, or a nine. As soon as the dice came to a stop, the judges were asked whether they would sentence the woman to a term in prison greater or lesser in months than the exact number showing on the dice. Finally, the judges were instructed to specify the exact prison sentence they would give to the shoplifter. On average, those who rolled a nine said they would sentence her to eight months. Those who rolled a three, said they would sentence her to five months. The anchoring effect was 50%.” 

Think about that. Judges with more than 15 years’ experience on average, were influenced by something as trivial as a dice role in determining how long somebody would be sent to prison. There’s a 50% anchoring effect on these highly trained, highly experiences experts. People who we think of as totally unbiased. And we’ve talked before about in a number of the “Weapons of Influence” episodes on the podcast about how other factors can substantially influence judges in their decision making. But it’s really scary sometimes when you think about the fact that our judicial system can be influenced by such random and arbitrary things. But it further underscores the importance of the anchoring effect, and understanding it. And really grasping it so that we can become better decision makers. So that we don’t fall prey to these same mistakes. Because in your life, when you see a random number, it can impact your decision. The date, the time, your social security number. All of these things can change your decision making. Can change the way you value things. Can change the way you make quantitative decisions. So it’s something we have to be very aware of. Something we have to constantly cultivate an awareness of so that we don’t fall prey to this. So that we don’t get trapped. So that we don’t make bad decisions.

Kahneman has a phenomenal quote about the anchoring bias that I think sums this up really nicely. This is from, again, Thinking Fast and Slow. 

QUOTE: “The main goal of priming research is that our thoughts and our behavior are influenced much more than we know or want, by the environment of the moment. Many people find the priming results unbelievable because they do not correspond with subjective experience. Many others find the results upsetting. Because they threaten the subjective sense of agency autonomy. If the content of a screensaver on an irrelevant computer can affect your willingness to help strangers without your being aware of it. How free are you? Anchoring effects are threatening in a similar way. You’re always aware of the anchor and even pay attention to it. But you do not know how it guides and constrains your thinking. Because you cannot imagine how you would have thought if the anchor had been different or absent. However, you should assume that any number that is on the table has had an anchoring effect on you, and if the stakes are high you should mobilize your System Two combat the effect.” End quote.

He talks about a couple different things in there. One, he touched on priming, and I think - I wanted to loop priming back into this because if you haven’t listened yet to the priming episode, or the episode about framing. All three of these are environmental effects in ways your environment can massively shape your decision making at a subconscious level, even if you’re totally not aware of it. So, all of these effects are interrelated in many ways. And the ways that you combat them, the way you think about them, are all interrelated. He also mentioned a study that we haven’t talked about where a screensaver impacted people’s willingness to help strangers. That’s a study he talks about - digs into, in Thinking Fast and Slow. 

Again, there’s a lot more research behind every single one of these topics. I tried to cherry-pick a few stark and powerful examples for you on the podcast to really drive the point home. But there’s dozens more research studies that share and show all of these findings. The last thing to touch on briefly, is he talks about system two. We’ve touched on this in some of the other episodes, but System One and System Two are two different descriptions for parts of your brain that Kahneman uses in the book, Thinking Fast and Slow. System Two is essentially your sort of willful processing power. Willful conscious attention. If you think about it, System One is how you read, how you process language, how you process images, and have emotional reactions. System Two is how you do things like long division. So, Kahneman digs much more deeply into both of those the book Thinking Fast and Slow, but suffice it to say, for the effects of this quote, mobilize your conscious attention. Become aware of it. That’s how you combat things like the anchoring effect. That’s how you combat things like the priming effect and the framing effect.

All three of these are very very influential phenomenon. Things that you want to be aware of, mental models that you want to have in your mental toolkit. So, whenever you see a number thrown out there, understand that that could be influencing your decision making, especially if you’re making quantitive decisions. This has a ton of implications, whether it’s buying a house, whether it’s in business negotiations, whether you’re talking about the value of something, buying a car. People will try to use the anchoring bias on you all the time in your life. And sometimes it’ll happen by accident, sometimes it’ll happen consciously. But it’s something you want to really press pause, think about, and be aware of.

On the flip-side, you can also harness anchoring to your benefit if you’re presenting something, you want to frame something in a certain way. Remember, the previous episode we talked a ton about how important simple turns of phrase are, in shaping the way that things are framed and shaping people’s emotional reactions and decisions in the way that things are phrased. So if you haven’t yet listened to the framing episode, I highly recommend checking that out. But if you want to influence people’s decision making, get people to make the decisions that you think are the best possible decisions, anchoring can be another tool in that toolbox that can help you shape those decisions in a more proactive and effective way. 

July 20, 2016 /Lace Gilger
Mind Expansion, Decision Making

The Biological Limits of the Human Mind

November 03, 2015 by Austin Fabel in Emotional Intelligence, Decision Making, Mind Expansion

On this episode of "The Science of Success", we explore one of the fundamental underpinnings of psychology: the brain itself. 

Your brain is a roughly million-year-old piece of hardware, designed to operate in the world of hunting and gathering, where dangerous animals and competing humans may lurk behind the nearest bush.

While our society has changed massively in the last 10,000 years (or even the last 500 years), our brains have not had time to catch up.

As a result, you and I are equipped with a tool that is riddled with shortcuts and processing errors, which can manifest themselves in mistakes, calamities, and all around terrible decisions.

To find out how you can get around these and make life a little easier, listen to this week's episode "The Biological Limits of the Human Mind".

 Also, continue the conversation by following Matt on Twitter (@MattBodnar) or visiting his website MattBodnar.com.

Thank you so much for listening!

Please SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE US A REVIEW on iTunes! (Click here for instructions how to do that!).  

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

We’re going to start our discussion today with a story of a turkey. A mother turkey, to be precise. Turkeys are very caring parents. Research has actually shown that there’s a certain sound - a “cheep cheep”, or a “chirp chirp” sound that’s an automatic trigger built into turkeys by evolution. What happens is when a turkey hears this sound, it’s almost like a switch goes off in the turkey’s mind. And it immediately goes to nurture and take care of its young. That makes sense, then. The vast majority of the time, that works out perfectly. But here’s where it gets really interesting: If you take that sound and you record it, and you put it on a stuffed polecat. A polecat is an animal that’s one of turkey’s natural predators. The turkey will immediately go out to the stuffed polecat and begin to nurture it, just like one of its baby chicks. Which is a pretty surprising reaction, especially when you consider the fact that if you don’t have a recording of the “cheep cheep” sound with a stuffed polecat, the turkey will go absolutely insane and ruthlessly attack the stuffed polecat with its life. Why is the turkey doing that? The biological shortcuts are programmed into the turkey’s mind by the process of evolution. This is called by psychologists a “Click, Whirr” response. 

The famed psychology professor Robert Cialdini, author of the book Influence, has shown us that this sort of Click, Whirr response, which sounds kind of ridiculous, right? You know, what, how are these turkeys so dumb that they’re literally taking care of their arch nemesis one day, then if they don’t have this particular sound, they’re suddenly flipping and attacking them. But what happens is, as Robert Cialdini has shown, and many other psychology researchers, this phenomenon is actually a biological shortcut that’s programmed in the turkey’s mind, and humans have many of the same biological shortcuts.

So, let’s back up a million years. I want to talk about the selective power of evolution, and really understanding the mechanics of evolution and what it means. A lot of people when they hear, or when they talk about evolution, they think that “the strong survive”, or “the best survive”, whatever that means. But really what evolution is talking about is that the most well-adapted to their environment happened to survive more often, and thus happened to reproduce. And so, the environment selects, kind of the optimal characteristics for survival. So, through evolution these turkeys happen to - the turkeys that happen to have sort of a natural trigger that when they hear the “cheep cheep” sound, they go and take care of their young. Those turkeys took more effective care of their young than turkeys that had other behavioral patterns. So, those turkeys reproduce more often and more frequently. And thus, that trait, over hundreds of years, over millions of years, over thousands of years, was slowly embedded into the turkey’s behavior. Similarly, human beings have many of the same biological Click, Whirr responses as turkeys. And if you think about it, human beings most of our evolutionary history has taken place in a hunter-gatherer society. And within that hunter-gatherer society, or even pre-hunter-gatherer society, evolution naturally selected a number of behavioral traits that are embedded in the human mind, into our psychology, that are completely non-optimal for living and existing in today’s society. In fact, if you were to compress the four million year evolutionary history of human society into just twenty four hours, the advent of agriculture would take place at 11:55 p.m., just a shade before midnight. So, if you think about the fact that the evolutionary time scale of our development was nearly four million years, and that agriculture, which was even thousands of years ago, was only at 11:55 p.m., on that 24-hour window. You really get a sense of how much time we’ve sort of had to adjust to the constraints and stresses of modern day society. What happens is the things that are naturally selected in a hunter-and-gatherer environment were you’re, you know, foraging for food. You’re living in a small tribal society, you’re dealing with predators, you’re dealing with all different kinds of dangers. The behavior patterns that are selected by evolution that are optimal for survival in those circumstances are not the same behavior patterns that are optimal for succeeding in today’s society and in today’s world.

Society has changed massively in the last two or three hundred years, let alone the last several thousand years, let alone the last several million years. So there’s a couple key ways that these changes manifest themselves. One of the first examples is the idea of seeking explanations for things. Wanting to understand, wanting to put an explanation to something that isn’t necessarily always right, isn’t necessarily there, doesn’t necessarily fit. This is kind of a pattern recognition which humans are incredibly effective at recognizing patterns. So much so that sometimes we recognize patterns that don’t even exist. 

Another way that this manifests itself is through fear and anxiety. When you think about it, if you’re living in kind of the world of the hunter-gatherer, if you have all of these stresses taking place, if you have a predator lurking behind a bush, if you eat these berries and they’re poisonous, you may not live, right? All of these different things in that world – it pays to be very cautious, it pays to be very skittish, it pays to avoid taking risks and to be very anxious about what might happen to you if you were to take a certain course of action. In reality, that sort of behavior is deeply engrained into us. Some people use the term “lizard brain” to describe that type of behavior. 

Another way this manifests is in fast classifications. If you’re living in a world and you see something, hunter-gatherer sight, and you see something? You need to be able to classify it immediately and people that work really quickly at classifying “that’s a threat, that’s dangerous, this is safe.” The most quickly they could do that, the faster they could make a decision, and the higher probability they have of surviving. But the reality is a lot of times those fast classifications in today’s society, we end up making the wrong classifications, or are evolutionary programmed mental shortcuts end up short-circuiting. 99% of the time, those shortcuts are designed to be incredibly effective, right? To the point that there’s so much information that deluges us every day that we get hit with. Nonstop ads and e-mails and all kinds of things, that we have to have an ability to filter out a lot of that junk. But the reality is, occasionally, these fast classifications and these mental filters, will let something in or classify something in a way that’s completely inappropriate, and you have this sort of outsized event takes place there a massive mistake happens, that you never could have foreseen because your mental shortcuts essentially misfired.

Another thing that was preprogrammed to us in this hunter-gatherer world is the focus on society and the tribe. If you think about, you know, from a reproductive standpoint, somebody who gets exiled from the tribe, loses food, lose potential mates, lose – it’s pretty much a death sentence in many ways to get exiled from a tribe in a hunter-gatherer world. So, people naturally develop the traits that led them to wanting to please others, and many of these traits are incredibly beneficial. Occasionally they misfire. But focusing on not wanting to – not wanting to do something that’s not socially acceptable. Wanting to get the approval of other people. All of these things were essential in survival in a world where being exiled from the tribe means your death. 

But the reality is all of these different filters manifest themselves in a way that is completely counterintuitive and unproductive in many of the contexts we find ourselves today in the modern world. The same sort of Click, Whirr psychological shortcuts that are essential to survival in the hunter-gatherer world, in today’s high-pressure business and social situations, can give us exactly sort of the wrong impulse, exactly the wrong way to think about how to handle these situations. And so this idea that there are sort of hard biological limits on your mind, your subconscious, your mind, your ability to process things, your innate, built in biases and the way you perceive the world. Every single human has a ton of inherent challenges and problems inside their mental machinery. It’s been pre-programmed to us for millions of years where, evolution, the hunter-gatherer society, has essentially sculpted the human brain into a tool that, while perfectly optimized to survive and reproduce in the world of a million years ago, has a number of shortcomings in today’s society. 

This is kind of one of the most critical first things to understand if you really want to understand the psychology of peak performance. You have to understand what the physical limits of the brain are. You have to understand that these limits exist so you can start to realize and see the patterns in the ways that it plays out where your biological limits within your mind naturally cause you to make certain judgements - to feel certain ways - to think about things in a certain fashion that are not the right ways to think about it, that are not the optimal ways to think about it. And so, throughout the course of this podcast, I’m going to teach you a bunch of different cognitive biases, a bunch of different ways that you trick yourself, that your mental circuitry short-circuits and give you the tools and capabilities to be able to overcome these problems, be able to understand and see your own mental limitations so you can achieve the goals you want to achieve, so you can be successful, so you can master your own psychology. 

Warren Buffett has an analogy where he talks about the mind as a motor. Your IQ, or your innate intelligence or talent, represents your horsepower. Right? Say, an engine has 500 horsepower, whatever it might be. Your IQ sort of represents that raw potential. But your output is what actually counts, right? Do you have the toolkit mentally and the mindset and the ability to use that 500 horsepower engine to go 10 miles an hour, or to go a hundred miles an hour? And the biological limits set in place by evolution over millions of years of human history are going to naturally constrain in many ways your ability to do that, and without the sort of self-awareness and knowledge of what those biases are, you’re inherently limiting your ability to maximize the output of your engine. So, I want to teach you the tools. I want to give you the framework to think about all of these different pieces of the puzzle so you can really understand how am I lying to myself? How is my mind tricking me? What are the shortcuts that are naturally misfiring in my mind, that are causing me to have these challenges, or issues, or preventing me from achieving the goals that I want to achieve?

And so that’s what we’re going to talk about throughout this series, Science of Success. And this is really one of the cornerstones, kind of fundamental pieces of understanding what is necessary to sort of grasp the depths of the human mind, and grasp and understand how performance really functions, and how the mind truly functions. 

November 03, 2015 /Austin Fabel
Emotional Intelligence, Decision Making, Mind Expansion
  • Newer
  • Older