Home 🏠 🔎 Search


Bad Transcripts
for the
Beat Your Genes Podcast & More

Episode 120: A novel approach to cravings for junk, Personality differences and dislikes
an auto-generated transcript


To get a shareable link to a certain place in the audio,
hover your mouse over the relevent text,
right click, and "copy link address"
(mobile: long press & copy link address)
 


all right well today we've got a couple of questions one on a cram circuit know that dr. Valley you've talked about in previous podcasts and also on a couple of the live Facebook videos and and then we've got a couple of questions on personality friends and and also about Morris team dynamics so we'll take away with the plant-based question dear dr. Lyle despite being a hundred percent Whole Foods plant-based I'm still very have a very active crammed circuit it's usually on low calorie dense foods like fruits or potatoes beans etc so it's not causing the excess weight but eating into the pain invariably makes me feel bad induces sleepiness and other negative side effects could you please comment on how various combinations of personality traits might impact one's ability to conquer this crammed circuit in particular and step away from the table when I'm satiated for example I'm unlucky enough to have relatively high disagreeableness low emotional stability low conscientiousness and I can remember first activating my cram circuit around eight years old when my mom cooked Purdue Oven stuffer Roasters with potatoes and I would cut it all up into a big mound with lots of chicken fat and go to town so despite me being on a percent Whole Foods plant-based now I still struggle with this deeply ingrained pattern okay all right well first of all I believe there's a I think I have spotted a bit of a psychometric problem with with some people with some people trying to analyze themselves with any online tests about the big five and that is that I think there's a tendency for the high conscientious people to actually underestimate themselves I think it's a very curious thing and this these kinds of tests have not been through some of the tricky rigorous psychometric techniques that we need to to do some other psychological testing over the years so I have a feeling that sometime there's there may be a subgroup here that is it is not responding to the questions the way we might want them to so person that asked this question and is talking about this kind of history strikes me is there that there probably are they're probably quite high in conscientiousness now except that they feel low in conscientiousness because they're not doing everything just perfectly you see how that could be now so I'm not so sure about personality issues with respect to the cram circuits particularly other than obviously possibly more impulsive Nisour or less stability that could certainly be involved I think it's also probably high openness people are generally probably more impulsive but this the cram circuit is is just to to fill people in that have never heard me talk about this that it's my name for what I believe is a tendency in human nature to eat past normal satiety levels when there are high high calorie dense foods available this would make sense to me from an evolutionary point of view it's certainly going to be things think behavior you're going to see an animal behavior when you put rich food in an animal cage and so it would have been an evolutionary sound strategy that the humans when they came across high calorie dense foods particularly in times when they would have had them in abundance that they would cram them in there in other words they would eat past normal satiety levels now an herbivore with a single kind of food like a koala bear eating eucalyptus leaves would never have this characteristic because they would never have a food stuff that would be you know three four five hundred percent more calorically rich than their normal child and so they wouldn't they wouldn't have this as a tendency to do this because they would never eat anything other than their normal Chow and it's going to be within very narrow parameters in terms of color density but human beings are hunter-gathering omnivores and so as a result occasionally they would get very rich foods in fact fairly periodically so meat would have been a rich food that human beings would would gladly look forward to at $800 a pound not necessary for for optimum human functioning however it would have been necessary and many times in order to survive just to get enough calories and so as a result meat also would not have come in regular amounts I you dollars per hour in the way that digging potatoes and foraging for berries would be a fairly predictable meat would be come in in enormous success and great famine it would have been a highly variable food source and so when and also highly perishable so when a major killing was made the right thing to do would be to cram up to the gills which is exactly what the big predators do because they don't know when they're going to make another kill again so that being the case the problem is is that that this wouldn't have been a problem at all for for early humans but in the modern environment that same tendency can be essentially conditioned to the where the point is is that where would have happened only you know once twice a month now it can be happening every day and if something happens every day or nearly every day what happens is is that your nervous system essentially anticipates it and therefore gets ready to deal with it and in this case it would mean that even after you were full it would expect you to continue to eat and therefore essentially drive digestive enzymes in neuro chemistry that is preparing for the onslaught of the cram so you can condition a cram circuit to the point where even after you're full you will be getting feelings like you should still be continuing to eat and that's what I call the conditioned cram now let's persons telling us that they are cramming on foods that are not calorically rich which is rare but it is something that is occasionally seen I would say in general out of very high conscious people okay those are going to be the people that are going to be doing this now the so there's nothing unusual about this other than the food choices that the persons making which I believe are probably excellent ones but he's eating into the pain the word she's actually having having this happen the way out of this is to to understand that that you have a counter conditioning process that you must go through and so you have to understand this is the equivalent of being addicted to cigarettes not in terms of health consequences but in terms of the schema that this thing is that it's following so if you're a cigarette smoker you're kind of on a timing clock where you're going to smoke say once an hour and so your nervous system is anticipating that it's building up neuro chemistry in order to diffuse the impact of the nicotine and if you don't get that nicotine then that the defense against the nicotine sits in your nervous system and actually causes you an uncomfortable feeling that we call craving and then when you smoke the cigarette the nicotine and the internal internally designed deactivator that nicotine meet in the middle and they diffuse each other or counteract each other and therefore you feel a relief so that is a highly reinforcing cycle that takes place and this person is undoubtedly has set up this very same process with respect to food so when you're full you are expecting to cram and if you do not cram it's going to be uncomfortable you're going to crave the cram so even though you eat into pain the system is ready for you to do it and there is a comfort in essentially having all those digestive enzymes and anything else that has been released you know close the loop on that process now I don't know if it's digestive enzyme or not I'm actually speculating that that's true the but I'm I'm confident that the the craving that people feel once they're full is an engineered condition phenomenon that's that isn't my theory that's something that's been discovered now the now what do we do about this well you can know that you have to go through a counter conditioning process that is probably going to take you know a week to get through the worst of it where you just have to white-knuckle it and not do it and people will jump up and down and say yes but what if I can't do it it's like well then you're addicted cigarettes for your whole life and you died of lung cancer in other words there are consequences to not breaking conditioning paradigms conditioning paradigms are depending upon what substance we're talking about they can be very difficult to break and so processed food for example can be pretty difficult it's not nearly as hard as cigarettes by the way it's not as potent to cigarettes so anybody that craves that chocolate and saying oh my god I just craved the chocolate I understand that you are that you do have an addictive like process but it is not as intense as somebody getting off cigarettes it's someone who has watched thousands of people get off of various and sundry substances I can tell you that getting off cigarettes is tougher now that doesn't mean this is trivial and in this case we're not getting away from even processed foods we're just getting away from the conditioning paradigm of cramming now it's interesting all of these eating type things and their and their problems associated with them whether they be the neuro adaptation to super rich foods and so we only like to taste rich foods or they conditioned cram process you know white knuckling it is one way there's also another technique that we rarely talk about here but you know people know me as being many people know that that I am the psychologist for True North health center in Northern California and what true North Center is is it's actually a place that specializes in water only fasting so if you haven't heard me talk about this and you just know this as a as a place where we discuss you know personality in romance love and evolutionary psychology this is this is one of the most bizarre fascinating and important behavioral adaptations that that you could imagine so listen carefully while I describe the importance of this this is a what water fasting is a water fasting is in fact a behavioral adaptation this is a this is a human instinct and it's not just a human instinct yet it's throughout the animal kingdom so when animals get ill they fast the the reason for this is that they are better off not putting new food in their mouths they're better off getting under a bush and hiding and essentially not eating that's their best move when they're ill it turns out that when you do this there's a whole host of mechanisms that will optimize healing response immune function all kinds of things that the organs basically don't have to metabolize foods the eliminate of organs and and the the filtering mechanisms like the liver and kidneys basically things get much easier and so this is a spectacular opportunity for the body to get well and to give it its best chance to survive and it turns out that you can also do it electively so animals wouldn't do the selectively but not if they're not ill but it turns out that human beings can use this selectively and actually improve their health over where they are by using this technique so it is also the case in addition to using water fasting which is a completely and utterly natural adaptation but we can we can use it electively it can also be the case that it of course will do an awful lot of things along the purely digestive and taste preference domains so as you would expect if you put any sensory system under total deprivation that system will recover its sensitivity faster than in any possible way so the if you are if your eyes are overwhelmed with bright lights if you completely shut off all access to light even so you can't even see any light through your eyelids it's going to turn out that the sensitivity to light will recover quicker than if you have yourself in a room of if you just dial down the lights so the same thing is true well in any sensory domain so the you will become more sensitive to sound if we completely have no sound in the background and now your your ears become very acutely sensitive to the slightest noise okay so the same thing is true of taste so if you are not enjoying the taste of whole natural foods and you've heard that it's a good idea for your health then one of the smartest things that you could possibly do it would be to water fast so you might do it for a day and it turns out the name in a day 24 hours you will increase your sensitivity to the taste of food now you can imagine what will happen if you do that for several days so it will turn out that people that thought that they could not stand food there wasn't laden with with fat salt are suddenly willing and eagerly eating foods that are whole natural out of the garden five or six days later after water fast because the taste buds have changed dramatically in the same way that your your your eyes can change dramatically in their sensitivity if you go into a dark room and then you go to a light room so this is uh this is water fasting and this is a spectacular potential that sits under the nose of modern medicine and modern medicine barely knows about it now it's starting to get more traction we published some significant works in the field and others are extremely interested major academics throughout the United in the United States and around the world so this is now finally getting out of the whack job arena and into the arena of serious consideration and scholarship and it's it's superb now why am I saying all this well for one thing our questionnaire here is struggling with a condition cram circuit we're not struggling with the pleasure trap but they're struggling with a nervous system that appears to be conditioned cramming the the ultimate abstinence for this would be a water fast and so I would recommend this person might go 2 or 3 days maybe a couple days on their own don't eat anything and let's see if we can re sensitize those nerves to the point where when you eat an intermediate level of food that feels you know that we've quieted down the conditioning paradigm and essentially broken its its predictive cycle now that might not do it but even 2 or 3 days might do it and it might be easier for you to go two or three days on water over a long weekend than it would be for you to try to eat intermediately and stop so that's one thing the other reason actually is it turns out fortuitous question the Turner of Health Center were we are well known in this in this arena of the world and in Alan Goldhamer my good friend who runs the place is very reasonable and cost-conscious and so therefore it's not particularly expensive and so something that is really good for you and not for expensive gets very popular and you can't get into the place if you wanted to right now the waiting lists three or four months to get in it's great experience people turn helps people turn their lives around it helps them get out of the pleasure trap it helps them move through a variety of health conditions lose weight reverse their diabetes reverse their high blood pressure etc etc however sounds good you don't hear me promoting it because there's no reason to promote it because you can't get in it's good for you to know about it in case you want to go someday plan in advance but it turns out that we have a new center we have a new place to go and the new place to go is being opened by nobody other than your host Nate g8g I'm now going to expose him Nate he is actually dr. Nathan Hirschfeld and he was a staff doctor at True North health center for several years where he learned this technique from the inside out and we lost Nathan because he wanted to go back down to Southern California for towards his roots but now he is opening a new facility in is it your Belinda is that where you are yep in normal Linda in Orange County and it's got a small elite nice place where you you get this very same type of service and very same type of process where people that are interested in having this experience for a reasonable very reasonable you know rates just TrueNorth like where you get an exquisite place to slow down take a water fast have someone who really knows what they're doing to supervise the process this is a there's obviously a big ad for for my friend Nate here but the reason why I'm saying it is that this is a this is a great opportunity for people to be able to do this if they are interested in this kind of an experience and one that you don't have to wait for months to get in so I've exposed you I gave you an ad and I would I'd say a lot more and I will in the future because I think this is a just a fabulous thing I've been trying to talk you into this for a long time I finally wore you down and I'm really looking forward to this all all coming together and given and you basically offering this for folks to have a great a great experience all right okay that's a thank you very much for the endorsement dr. weiland for four people who are going to be coming in dr. Lyle you're actually going to come and speak at the Center in July so I was you that was so yet for anything you can go to www.hsn okay so for our next question dear dr. Lyle are we prone to disliking people whose personalities vastly different I assume it's not only the highly conscientious person who dislikes the flake but also that the flake dislikes the highly conscientious person of course when they're not exploiting them you know that's a it's a good question and they're nosing around here and they've got a they've got a hold of the piece of it so let's let's look at at what's actually happening that people what people are doing always is the running cost-benefit analysis so it's going to turn out that in an underlying theme of the cost-benefit analysis is not just how not how beneficial the individual might be but how beneficial might they find me because there's an esteem dynamic process that's important here because we're trying to have cachet in essentially a Stone Age village algorithm and so we want to be we want to be liked so we won't don't want to just like people we want to be liked by people and it's going to turn out as we is we step through the big five plus intelligence we're going to see that these descriptions of people are not value free in other words the the very words themselves convey an evaluative component that we aren't going to miss so smart versus dumb we know that the smart person is more valuable than the dumb person unless we're trying to exploit people which point the value the dumb person's more valuable to be exploited so but in two people looking at each other and evaluating each other the smart person does not value the dumb person but the dumb person could value the smart person because the smart person could be extremely useful in helping them make decisions okay so there is not a dislike there per se now you could say what you could find all kinds of situations where the person who's not too Swift may be very uncomfortable or rather smart people because they can't protect their poker chips or their wives or anything else or their property okay but in principle the the lesser valuable individual would dislike the more valuable individual you would have to have contextual features of the situation to make that a dislike ie a threat to them okay the the smart person doesn't dislike the less smart person at all okay they bet they don't fight them all things being equal so this is how that would work so now let's move on to openness so the highly open people do not find the less of the low people or the very conventional people to be something that they would dislike except to the point where if there's an esteem process or a control process boom or the high openness folks activities are going to be made illegal or in some ways censured by the village at which point then there's going to be some animosity but in principle there's no reason for the animosity okay and so and below the low adventurous people are not hating the high adventurous people they find them somewhat interesting but bizarre and you know stay away from my children because I don't want you taking them Tibet and you know shooting heroin so there's reasons why the the highly conventional people would be leery of the highly open people because in the modern environment too highly open people can get into some really crazy crap it's really dangerous worse than they could have in the Stone Age and so that this is so there isn't hate here but it's a wariness and uncomfortableness that can go on between people that are vastly different the now if we were going to go to onto conscientiousness now we can see that that the highly conscientious people aren't necessarily hating flakes but they simply don't value them and they absolutely are frustrated with them if the flakes are somehow impeding the highly a conscientious person's progress or their safety so then they're angry because they feel like they're they're in an unfair situation and they're being exposed to risk that they don't want the the flaky person does not find any reason to hate the highly conscientious person unless they're in a power situation where the highly conscientious person is being can effectively threaten their interests by you know because of the flakiness so there isn't any reason why these people would hate each other it's a matter of it's a matter of cost-benefit analysis where context becomes all-important so that's but you can see that where there are substantial differences in personality you start to see differences in in value in in coalition general value and you can see that there could be the seeds of resentment discomfort and even threat okay so you can see that for example a highly open person two men one of which is quite a bit more open and there's a female in the room and they're both say intermediate extroverted but as the discussion starts to arise the highly open person is likely to be more interesting all things being equal because they've had a more interesting life they've exposed themselves to more dangers they've done more wacky crap and therefore there are more interesting mine and possible information so all things being equal the female may be quite a bit more drawn to the more open person which means the less open person is frustrated and angry because they're getting essentially interference and they're in their goals there so this is these kinds of dynamics in other words we do notice when people have personality is different than our own and sometimes those differences will wind up being problematic and drive some some conflicts of interest which will lead to what we call dislike is there a jealousy circuit that's different from physical attractiveness oh yes in other words of course there is there's you feel angry jealous envious etc when you when other people are or interfering when you see them as interfering with your with your goals so it just so happens that probably the most visceral of there is probably extra little juice in the circuits and slightly different circuits when we start talking about the the romantic jealousy process that particular thing we we have evidence from David bus's research that that under those conditions the jealousy mechanisms for example in males and females have been scripted differently by evolution to have somewhat different feelings associated with what they are going to do about the the jealousy threat but certainly we absolutely have that very same type of feeling when we feel like we have competitors in any adaptive domain in you know in any esteem domain absolutely fascinating I was uh I was reminded of a quote when I was reading this question that I stumbled upon while ago it said that by Nick Saban is mediocre people don't like high achievers and high achievers don't like mediocre people and from your answer it seems like that that's actually a little that quote is not exactly accurate yes it's not accurate the it's uh it loses I mean it's it's got a it's got a disagreeable dominant swagger to it that we can enjoy you know that some of us would find entertaining but the truth is is that it's not fundamentally true there is much much greater nuance to this issue you you can to say that would be to say that the average foot soldier you know did not did not love Dwight the Eisenhower which they did okay in other words they knew that this guy was extremely careful in trying to defend lives he was you know he was extremely careful competent executive and he felt deeply towards the the responsibility that he had trying you know to try to save as many lives as he possibly could while getting this important task accomplished and so the people that were aware of this and were aware that that was his personality you know there's a reason why there was a phrase that one the the I believed it was the 52 and 56 Presidents elections I like Ike okay that that it wasn't he didn't have the the brutal rugged disagreeable personality of uh you know of a patent he was but he he was extraordinarily capable and you can see the value that that the less competent people can understand just how valuable highly competent people could be they can adore them as and and it can be mutual in other words I felt the responsibility of those abilities and he he cared you know deeply about people no matter how humble so you know that that quote is a swaggering swashbucklers quote but it does not actually define the the the esteem dynamics that we see in human nature yeah it seems like that quote even is is more along the lines of a political definition where it's the whole lazy versus you know that they're assuming that someone who's not a high achiever is therefore lazy rather than just you know being form different genes absolutely and difference or now census as well yes all right ok next question is dear doctor while you explain how well most of us do our best to find someone of higher status when selecting mates but what about when we select for friends do we also seek out friends with higher status when we pause for a second here um I don't think we seek out mates of higher status that's not quite accurate they're close and so god forbid I always shudder because I might have said that and and yet it wasn't encompassing what it is that I would what I would mean or I would would be more precise what we seek is to optimize mate value so we're running a total cost-benefit analysis on potential mates and the the mate status ie when we talk about status we would be talking about for example their objective status how how fancy other people would find them that is one characteristic of that mate that would go into our cost benefit of the mate and there would be many reasons why that characteristic would be important but it would not be the only thing that would be important okay there there could be a characteristic about a particular mate that that the the rest of the world would not consider particularly valuable but you would consider particularly valuable okay you could easily have a situation where well let me give you an example I mean this is trivial it just leaps to mind and that is that the world doesn't particularly give you any objective chips for being highly health-conscious that's no big deal like that never got me laid now once not even love okay it's back so when I meet people if I do anything I cloak that for God's sakes so the so the the point is is that the however if if someone were to meet me that happen to vial value that very highly then I would be getting some extra chips for that perhaps so this is why it is that status in quotes is is really when we're talking about that we're talking about an objective made value by that what I mean is if a thousand people were to rate an individual across the major dimensions of of appeal you know where would your mate belong which or maybe you know for your age group and you know and your gender would your would your person be 66 percentile mate would they be an 82nd percentile mate would be a 36 percentile mate would to be a 93 third percentile mate there is some objective value that that the person you're considering would have okay and we we can guesstimate pretty well what that would be and and so it could easily be the case that we can meet two people let's suppose we're trying to trade in the eight range and so we're hoping to qualify for an eight and it turns out that we meet two people one of which looks like to us like an eight and a half and the other one looks like a seven and a half and so we can we estimate that the objective mate value of the eight and a half you know that's a significant chunk higher but it turns out that we don't particularly or don't feel that much appeal towards them we just don't for whatever reason all the idiosyncratic reasons of who it is that we are the seven and a half feels like it's very promising and we're very interested okay so are do we care about that status difference we might okay a strange bird might prefer the seven and a half because it's like hey I have to do less mate guarding and worrying about them running off with somebody else I've known people that had that kind of idea in their head most people would not have that kind of idea in their head most people follow a conventional strategy that would say all things being equal I want the fanciest one okay and the reason why that would be is you can sniff in the higher mate value and therefore higher also higher status mate that that your children that your offspring would likely be fence here so this there's value there there it's also true that if you are with someone who is higher objective mate value than an alternative partner then even if you don't like them that much and you may dump them later or you get out of it later or may not work out for whatever reason the truth is is you may have marked yourself in the mating environment as somebody who could qualify for that higher mate value and it got seen and processed through the social matrix and therefore you've you've signaled victory in in that given domain at a higher level so you can see that you're a potential partners status or objective made value is that is a variable of interest okay it is it potentially is an enhancement to your mating pseudo esteem in other words they don't know why that person bid on you but they did and so therefore you know we don't know what's so fancy about you but maybe there's something fancy that we're not seeing and so that that is a that is of utility it's also utility of passing on fancier genes so we can see why it is that a person could actually go for someone who is fancier in terms of objective status even though they may like somebody else a little bit more so that is possible but we can also see that it is by no means the only consideration it is one of a host of considerations okay so that's that's where we're going to begin so people do not mate with the people behind status they can get they go after the highest total mate value of which status is one feature now the same exact thing is true of friends we run the very same global cost-benefit analysis on friends and it's going to turn out that their their status in the community let's just put it this way Nate if Colin Campbell calls me I'm gonna call him back quicker fuck you I'll wait for the web okay so this is this is going to how that's going to work and so this is uh so you're going to run these computations and so it isn't it of course we are cognizant of friends status but but that is not the only consideration so really good question and I'm glad to get a chance to to answer that and and hopefully clarify any other little misconceptions about mate value and maid status that that may have been under the hood fantastic all right we got time for one more question all right very good okay so du/dr well how does one have an argument about ideas without making your friend or partner feel like you're after their self-esteem or that that you're after their esteem our most people simply not wired for those types of discussions yeah we are not wired for those kinds of kinds of discussions it's really great question this is an A+ this is another beauty these are some great questions site yeah we're not wired for that and the the the humans desire to win argument is very very strong and this is and we are endowed with spectacular natural algorithms that your heuristics actually in other words they're it's not they're their bags of tricks inside the system that look for the weaknesses and the other person's side and then exploit it etc they'll raise the boys to I believe draw attention from the village to try to get an audience and then we're going to try to win quickly with it with the bag of tricks as fast as we can because we can immediately see weaknesses and the other person is argumented we distort their weaknesses and we we we distort our own weaknesses and our own arguments to minimize them etc we have selective memory for data that supports our position etc so there's a there's a whole host of I don't know that this has been well researched at all by social psychologists I I don't recall actually ever reading any articles about the or structure of arguments or even the evolutionary psychology I don't know if the able to Chasseur colleges are are very sensitive to this issue I don't recall ever reading anything about it I myself quite interested in this because as a psychotherapist who's done a great deal has a lot of experience with marriage and marriage counseling to watch the the gymnastics they go on between a couple that is that is basically trying to both play me to get their team so that their side wins the argument is really something to see and so I watched this with with breathtaking you know horror as I as I observe humans yeah it really I'd watch 100 IQ people pull out 140 IQ you know maneuvers that there was no possible way they could have ever thought it through they did it because like a fish that knows somehow not how to get caught there how kind of a trout with a for IQ out which outwit and experienced fishermen the answer is it's just got some genes in there that build some circuits to do it and the same thing is true of people in argument so the question is how do you do it I think you know with a lot of these things when it comes to bidding your genes you have to understand that we've got an inherent weakness here for this problem in the same way they've got an inherent weakness for now processed food in the environment and drugs and you know etc gambling if you're if you happen to have that chip you know you better stay out of Vegas and keep your money sequestered from that kind of thing you know this is argument on people obviously there's temperaments that are better than others agreeable people emotionally stable people conscientious people these people are going to have a much better chance of being able to play fair and to keep a disagreement from becoming disagreeable but the average rank-and-file human can't do it okay that's beyond their capabilities and so this is why we have a thing called diplomats in the world not because these people learn anything about what to do they can just do it they are they inherently have the tools to give ground and understand that the that's so often the right move is to show belly and to give a steam etc and these people it can be Naturals at this now for ourselves if we're not naturals understand that we have the CICC illa T's heel okay and the phrase that I try to keep in mind is from coach on wooden which is we can be we can disagree without being disagreeable and you're keeping that in the forefront and keeping in the forefront that when we attack another person's position that we we want to be extra careful to let them know that we are not attacking them and that we esteem them okay we esteem them we just see we see that we don't understand the logic that fully supports where they're coming from and we're not sure that it's right and so let's step our self down through the evidence see where it stops and then we may come to an opinion where the two of us we can't the the evidence doesn't all integrate in a certain way where one person's obviously right in the other person's obviously wrong and we have to say hey we don't know enough okay the social psychologist Lee Ross and Miss Pitt had a phrase that they attempted to be a meme that would percolate its way through scientific psychology and among social psychologists I think they did a pretty good job for a couple of couple of highbrow academics that didn't have a big audience I think they had just a big enough audience that for a few years I would hear their phrase because I believe they invented it and the invented the phrase is it's an empirical question okay and it's a it's a fancy phrase that I've used to to give smart people pause when they're so sure they're right and they're so sure I'm wrong or they're so sure somebody else is wrong and they're attempting to strong on the argument and I will say that's an empirical question ie we don't know until we get the evidence okay so we can't solve this theoretically those are interesting ideas who knows where the truth lies you may be right then maybe you may be partially right we're not really sure but in the end we may have an empirical question and that may be the only way we could solve it so this is a great question and the on my website I talked about when you're in a bind and you're in a tough argument in you're an empath how we have to use flooding the other person's circuits if you get into trouble so remember that flood the circuit is your bailout if you get into an argument with somebody that you care about and it you get into trouble you need to back up and you need to flood their circuit with a steam before you move on that's that's the way to do it without without having damage done to a relationship constantly it's it strikes me as particularly fascinating as how it's automatic a couple weeks ago I had a little argument with somebody I care about a lot and I was just being sensitive about something and they you know the argument continued in this type of way where I felt like I was they were after my esteem of course they weren't they were just talking ideas and that was my blind spot but then they you know and this person listens to the podcast mm-hmm and I realized later that they they kind of stopped everything put the brakes on and then just flooded my circuits for good you know 10 seconds or so and just everything everything disappeared and I remember looking back and saying wow they're floating my circuits now and I couldn't help myself I just I stopped feeling like it was an argument life's automatic was great yes that's fantastic I'm really glad you shared that and and that is that it's a beautiful thing that you were able to witness and so you can see even though it even though it you can seem even contrived which most people will never really quite come to the party that is contrived but it's contrived from exactly the right place and it's it's a thing of beauty to watch the esteemed dynamic shift inside of you and relax and realize that you're not under threat and that we can that we can move on in a really positive way that's beautiful story thank you glad glad you notice I'm glad they used this and it's a it's a great example for people to hear terrific mate
Back to the top
🏃     👖




Artist