Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'natural selection'.
Found 7 results
-
https://loopvids.s3.amazonaws.com/Feb18_Post.mp4 Humans are not nearly as logical as we like to believe. Or at least in the WAY we like to believe. We are logical, but the inputs are subjective. For example, you're standing in front of a buffet. And you've got one more spot on your plate. A baked potato, or some fries? It may feel like a random decision, but it's purely logical. You look at both, and each one gives you a certain feeling. Most of this happens subconsciously, but it happens. Each choices gives you a feeling that is based on LOT of inputs. And you'll choose the one with the strongest input. The reason formal logic seems so difficult is ALL the inputs, and their relationships, MUST be forced through our conscious brains. If A, and B, but not C, then .... If A and not B, and C then.. Even more complex is most of the inputs to our decisions are instinctive. Filtered through a kajillion generations of natural selection. This includes all the "non-logical" biases that we have. For example, something that seems purely illogical is the halo effect. A pretty girl says some random stuff. And we think it's much more important than it is. A smelly homeless guy says that same random stuff, and we think he's crazy. But the pretty girl says the random stuff, and we think she's a genius. Illogical, right? Well, not according to the mathematics of natural selection. Dudes who OVER estimated the importance of what pretty girls said paid more attention to pretty girls. And guys who paid more attention to pretty girls, compared to guys who IGNORED those pretty girls, had more sex with pretty girls. And from a pure natural selection standpoint, "pretty=healthy." So, from long, multi-generational frame of natural selection, OVERESTIMATING the importance of whatever pretty girls said was purely logical. But today, it doesn't seem to make much sense. Just like eating whatever we can, as much as we can, doesn't make much sense. But both were VERY important in the past. Most of the time, when we think of this "instinct mismatch," we tend to ONLY see it as a problem. Like girls getting way more attention and fame and money ONLY because of their looks. Or how HARD it is to maintain a healthy body. But we can also understand instinct mismatch, and leverage it to our benefit. Another kind of halo effect is something called "congruence." How much you BELIEVE what you are saying. This is the MAIN INGREDIENT in authority. And the dude who speaks with the MOST authority, based on the strength of their belief, is going to be the natural leader. And what do natural leaders get? Pretty much whatever they want. Including all the pretty girls. And you can build in this inner belief system, so you can RADIATE this mostly subconscious congruence. And be a natural leader in more and more situations. Learn How: https://mindpersuasion.com/inner-frame/
-
https://loopvids.s3.amazonaws.com/Dec10Post.mp4 A study was done on plenty of fictional books. To figure out what the overall structure was. And they found a certain short term pattern in nearly all of them. A good thing happened, and then a bad thing happened. Some of these were small, almost insignificant events, some were much larger. On a more meta level, you can find a bigger structure. Protagonist, Antagonist, build up, massive conflict, and (usually) happy ending. Or not "happy" ending, but a "satisfying" ending. Even thought some characters might not make it, the ending has a feeling of "completeness." One of the songs by the Beatles has an very huge ending. "A Day In The Life," has a huge orchestral buildup in the end. The buildup ends on a chord of MASSIVE tension. Then there is a pause, and FINALLY, the release. This a very "satisfying" ending. The tension is resolved. This is in most music, down to the chord progressions. Tension followed by release. Cycling throughout the entire song. Now, why do we humans CRAVE this kind of thing? You might wonder which came first, story structure or human nature? Or how, specifically did "they" create fiction and music and poetry to MATCH our deep emotions so specifically? It's the same basic process of natural selection. Imagine a group of ancient cavemen way back in the day. Kids would grow up listening to a bunch of different stories around the campfires. Some stories would be EPIC. The kind that stirred their emotions, and lay awake at night under the stars with ONE powerful dream about the hero of those stories: "When I grow up, I'm going to be JUST like him." On the other hand, there were likely stories that absolutely SUCKED. The responses to those stories were much different. Namely: "Dude, WTF?! That story was LAME!" Here's the natural selection part. When all those kids grew up, and it was THEIR turn to tell stories around the campfire, which stories did they tell? The ones they remembered. The ones that stirred their emotions. The ones that stirred their most POWERFUL emotions of ambition, love, loss, anger, fear, hatred, and the final satisfying ending. Not the lousy stories that didn't make any sense. Stories, movies, music, all art has similarly been passed through this organic, natural selection filter system. What's the META takeaway for all this? Humans are EMOTIONAL. The more profoundly you can move their emotions, the more they'll admire you, want to be around you, and follow you. But most people today are emotionally crippled. Most of us can only share a very small range of emotions. Learn about, appreciate and be comfortable expressions all your emotions, and you don't have to worry about anything else. Learn How: https://mindpersuasion.com/emotional-mastery/
-
https://loopvids.s3.amazonaws.com/July11Post.mp4 There are a lot of sales jobs that have the same basic structure. Low entry requirements. Very little training. If you can manage to sell, you can make a lot of money. Most do not. This is the Pareto Principle in action. Or the 80-20 rule. 20% of folks do most (80%) of the work. Work, of course, being relative. 20% of any books for any given publisher will get most of the sales. 20% of dudes will bang most of the ladies. 20% of the salespeople at any sales company will make most of the sales. Now, many people complain about this. They say sales companies should spend a lot of time and money training their employees. After all, they would make the money back, right? Not so fast. Think about the legacy publishing companies. Those old school, hundred year old businesses that served as the holy gatekeepers of fiction BEFORE self publishing became a thing. They had agents, editors, and people who read books just to pass them on to the next level. You'd think with all that experience, all those educated gatekeepers and screeners on their staff, they'd be able to sniff out the winners from the losers, right? Nope. No matter WHAT any organization does, they cannot beat Pareto. The 80-20 rule DOES NOT CARE how you choose. Within ALL the books those well educated literary super geniuses let pass their filters, the 80-20 rule still held true. The top selling books tended to SUBSIDIZE the crappy selling books. Those books that agents, editors, and gatekeepers read and thought to themselves, "Yeah, this will be a best seller!" DID NOT SELL. And guess what? Pareto is a smooth function. Within the top 20%, it still is in effect. That means with the top twenty percent of the top twenty percent does most of the work IN THAT top twenty percent. Which means that 4% (20% of 20%) does 64% (80% of 80%) of the sales. This is why there will ALWAYS be these types of distributions. Turns out those sleazy sales companies that hire anybody with a pulse aren't so stupid. They save a TON of money. Even if they did spend a ton of money on training they'd STILL be trapped in Pareto. And guess who else is a big fan of the Pareto Principle? A huge fan of the 80-20 rule? Mother Nature, that's who. Natural selection. Here you are, a living creature, with a thinking, rational brain. A ton of natural instincts. Just showing up and waiting for an opportunity won't work. Sitting around waiting for somebody else to make life fair won't work. What will work? Getting in the game. And getting some. Before somebody else does. Get Started: https://mindpersuasion.com/obstacle-obliteration/
-
Pareto Planet: https://mindpersuasion.com/pareto-planet/ https://loopvids.s3.amazonaws.com/Dec24Loop.mp4
-
Why You Are Evolving Stronger Germs: https://mindpersuasion.com/evolution-of-indestructible-roaches/ https://loopvids.s3.amazonaws.com/July14Loop.mp4
-
Natural selection is a very powerful idea. It's similar to split testing. If you tried out different ad campaigns in different zip codes, for example. Suppose you had eight different zip codes. And you had eight slightly different adverts for each zip code. You could easily see which ad was best, based on the sales you got. You wouldn't even need to know much about psychology. Once you found the best one, out of the eight, you could just make variations on that one. Or imagine if you opened a sandwich shop. You could spend tons of money on market research. Hire an expensive consulting firm to go door to door and see which kind of sandwiches people eat. Or you could just sell a bunch of different sandwiches, and see which ones sold the most. Keep selling more of those. Keep selling less of the others. When this happens in nature, it's spontaneous and organic. That's why it's called "natural selection." But you'll see this same strategy EVERYWHERE. Because it's so effective. Consider a venture capitalist. He's got a couple hundred million to invest. Does he need to be able to understand the deep undercurrents of the economy, or the future political winds? Not really. He just needs to invest a couple million in twenty or thirty different companies. Thirty companies times two million is sixty million dollars. If ONE company hits it big, and he sells it for 100 million (which is VERY common) he makes his money back. This is not only a very effective strategy, but it's also applicable in pretty much anywhere you want. Take a guy who wants to become more seductive. So long as he's willing to get out there and apply this strategy, he'll keep getting better. How, specifically does he apply it? The same way as the advertising campaign. Try a bunch of DIFFERENT strategies and choose the one that works best. Then try another set of winning strategies, which are variations on the previous winning strategy. The more you apply this strategy, the better you get. It also works in sales. And in business. It is also how we NATURALLY learn. The more we get POSITIVE feedback, the more we'll REMEMBER what worked. This is the natural way we humans develop better and better skills. When you apply this to making money, it's a perfect match. Whatever your job is, whatever job you want, whatever business you want to start, do SOMETHING. Every time you do SOMETHING, you'll get valuable feedback. And if you point your successive attempts toward more money, you'll GET more money. But only if you get rid of limiting money beliefs. Learn How: http://mindpersuasion.com/money-brain/
-
https://mindpersuasion.com/lifes-viciousness/
