Quantcast

Episode 408 Scott Adams: The Tale of Three Hoaxes, Most Recently about Candace Owens

Topics: 

  • Hoax: Claim that Candace Owens praised Hitler
  • Hoax: President Trump’s Charlottesville statement
  • Hoax: Virginia doctor promoting murder of healthy newborns
  • Lesson: Be hesitant about believing things that are ridiculous on the surface

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

Episode 252 Scott Adams: Israeli Bots, Ye, North Korea, #FentanylChina, Colbert

Topics: 

  • Colbert writer’s comment clarification…48 hour rule satisfied?
  • Kanye heading to the White House, meeting with POTUS and Jared
  • North Korea prediction: Meeting will happen this year (December)
  • 2 Chinese nationals producing Fentanyl have been identified
  • Democrat concerns about the courts being too conservative
  • Would any state be dumb enough to outlaw abortions?
  • Clever persuasion play by Adam Schiff, 0+0=1
  • Nuclear power plants, the only known solution for global warming
  • President Trump’s comment about Taylor Swift

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

Episode 125: The Protest That Was More of a Costume Party

Topics: 

  • Tip: Don’t protest for things you already have been given
  • The protests were about the protesters…look at ME!
  • Michael Ian Black’s 24/7 stress tweet, sincere offer to help him
  • Physical, mental symptoms that are real…TDS
  • The “crazy party” is the one that isn’t in power, GOP or DEM
  • People asking “Are you a Socialist?”
  • Death with dignity, voluntary check-out
  • Life and death gray areas…like abortion rights
  • Alan Dershowitz’s opinion on a Rosenstein recusal

 

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

 

 

Episode 122: Civil War, #Walkaway, The Weed Poison Pill, Mike Lee, Eliminating ICE

Topics: 

  • Schumer’s weed decriminalization bill…brilliantly evil by design
  • #Walkaway originator realized Liberals are being fear manipulated
  • MSM fear mongering creating a mental health issue for millions
  • Rebranding ICE…as NICE
  • Rowe v Wade, states banning abortion
  • What defines a man or a woman, genitalia or chemistry?
  • Mike Lee, risky Supreme Court nominee
  • “Civil war” possibility

 

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

Episode 77: North Korea Walk-Away and SPYGATE

Topics:

  • Trump cancels summit with North Korea
  • North Korea’s “big ask”
  • Taking down a Chinese bank supporting NK probable next step
  • 19,000 NK artillery sites, can drone tech neutralize?
  • MSM has earned their discredited label
  • MSM avoiding and disputing word “spy”…
  • …so POTUS brands the scandal SPYGATE
  • Funding the wall by direct donation to fund?
  • Our system of taxation might be changing
  • Planned Parenthood could also be funded by direct donations
  • Women are the only credible voices on abortion laws

 

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

For persuasion-related content in book form, see my bestselling book, Win Bigly.

Hypnotists Flips Pro-Choicers to Pro-Life in Seconds (I explain how)

Here’s a link to a provocative (and disturbing) short video of a hypnotist (my word) flipping pro-choicers to pro-life in minutes. I judge it to be real because the persuasion technique is solid gold. I’ll tell you how he did it after you watch.

I’ll explain the steps he used. These are not necessarily in order. 

Step One: Choose your subjects carefully

Notice that the subjects were on the young side. Young people are easier to flip because they haven’t had as long to harden their opinions and to make those opinions part of their core self-image. The hypnotist’s method would usually fail with people over fifty. (I assume, based on what I know of persuasion.)

Step Two: Pre-suasion

Read the book Pre-Suasion by Robert Cialdini to see how mentioning one topic (in this case the Holocaust) can bias you for an unrelated topic that you discuss right after. The trick is to put the pre-suasion immediately before the persuasion. You don’t want time to pass. The immediacy is what makes it work. You want topic A to conflate in your brain with topic B, even if they are unrelated.

Obviously you need to pick your priming topic carefully, and that isn’t always obvious. In Cialdini’s book he discusses a study that says people are more likely to vote Republican immediately after seeing an image of an American flag. That wouldn’t have been obvious to me. But in the 180Movie.com video it is a bit easier to see why the hypnotist chose the holocaust as his primer before discussing abortion.

The hypnotist shows us his technique with a word-play game. He asks his subjects to spell the word “shop.” Then he immediately asks them what they do when they see a green light. They reflexively say “stop” because he primed them with the word “shop.” (The correct answer is that green lights mean go, not stop.) The hypnotist accomplishes two things with this question. He first makes the subjects start to doubt their own common sense, which helps if you want to change a mind. But it is also a wink to the trained persuaders watching the video. He is showing us his technique. 

As I have told you in this blog before, persuasion works even if you know the technique and recognize it as it is happening to you. 

Notice also that the hypnotist chooses the holocaust because it has maximum emotional impact and he can describe a bulldozer scene that is chilling and visual. He also uses trial jury legend Gerry Spence’s method of putting them in the imagined scene so if feels personal. 

For maximum persuasion you want high visual content and high emotional content. The hypnotist maxed out on both. (This guy is not a beginner.)

Step Three: Make them convince themselves

The hypnotist asks questions and lets the subjects talk themselves into changing their opinions. If he directly challenged their beliefs they would just harden in their resistance. But he gives them encouragement and the freedom to do it on their own. That freedom is an illusion. He is changing their minds for them.

I use this method a lot. 

Step Four: Get them to say “baby”

The hypnotist tries to lead the subject into calling a fetus of any age a “baby.” He does that by showing sonograms of a fetus just a few weeks old. Remember that our visual sense is our strongest. Seeing eye-indications on the fetus makes us think of a human. It makes us assume life. It’s a reflex. 

Then he asks the subject to fill in the answer to the following question:

“It’s okay to kill a baby in the womb when…”

That’s triggers the subjects to become pro-life at that moment.

Step Five: Move them from certainty to doubt.

Some subjects probably didn’t say “baby” when prompted, so the hypnotist takes another path. He asks them if they would blow up a building if they didn’t know for sure whether or not there was a living person inside. Of course the subjects say no.

Then the hypnotist connects the dots. You can’t be 100% certain there is no “life” in a fetus, even at a few weeks from conception. It is unknowable.

The subjects in the film give up at that point and express pro-life sentiments.

Notice that “blow up the building” is super-strong visual imagery. That is good technique.

Step Six: Make them say the new opinion out loud

The hypnotist makes his subjects state clearly and publicly their new position as pro-lifers. Cialdini’s book Influence teaches us that once you commit to a stance it becomes hard to change your mind. So as soon as the hypnotist got the conversion he wanted he locked it in by making them proclaim their new position in public.

Step Five: Ignore the failed attempts

I assume the video leaves out any failed attempts. This isn’t the sort of thing that works every time. It leaves the viewer with the idea that pro-choicers are just confused. All they need is two minutes of explanation and they will flip.

The reality is that most people are locked into their positions on abortion. The hypnotist in this video is crazy-good, but you can’t flip most people that quickly.

Still, the fact that it can work at all should tell you that everything you ever thought about human rationality was wrong.

Update: Some of you asked what method could be used to flip someone from pro-life to pro-choice. That’s harder because the emotional argument is heavily biased to one side. (You can’t top a dead baby-maybe.) And emotion is a big part of persuasion. The Persuasion Filter predicts a long term trend toward restricting abortion rights simply because that side of the debate got their persuasion right, finally. 

My own view on abortion is that men like me should sideline themselves on this topic and let women decide what situation is most credible and tolerable. I’ll follow their lead. I add nothing to the quality of the decision. (The financial dimension is a separate question.)

On a totally unrelated note, what is the most useful and entertaining book you have ever read? 

Scott Adams

Author of How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big

The Thought Experiment that Broke Your Brain

Here’s a little thought experiment you can try at home. Identify a Clinton supporter who cares deeply about keeping abortion legal. Ask the person if they would support the following change in Federal law:

Proposed: The Federal government declares abortion to be legal under federal law – now and for all time – for both the doctor and the patient, when the procedure is done in the first trimester.

I expect that most people who favor abortion would agree with this proposed law. It says exactly what they want – that abortion would be legal under federal law.

The trick is that I just described Trump’s policy preference for abortion. Trump prefers that abortion be legal from a federal perspective and stay that way. States would still be free to impose restrictions, but the federal government would be out of it. 

Notice that all I did for this thought experiment was restate Trump’s position as a positive. Trump wants to select Supreme Court justices that take the federal government out of the abortion question and leave it to the states to decide. 

Historically, the reason our Constitution leaves a lot of power to the states is because local governments have a better feel for their citizens, and some states are very different from others. One size doesn’t fit all. For practical reasons, you want the government that is closest to the people making the life-and-death decisions such as capital punishment, abortion, and doctor-assisted-dying. 

That thinking made sense a few hundred years ago when people were not as mobile and the Internet didn’t exist. But imagine how different things would be today if Roe Vs. Wade were overturned in the courts. Here’s how that would probably end up:

1. Some states would immediately ban abortions.

2. States with bans would become cancerous to major employers who can’t recruit talent to a state with no abortion rights. Over time, most states would have to cave to the economics of it.

3. Volunteer networks would spring up that provide services to transport women who want abortions to neighboring states. There is so much passion around this topic that you can guarantee an immediate work-around network will emerge, probably with apps that help women find rides and housing in nearby states. This wasn’t practical before Roe Vs. Wade but it would be totally feasible now, with the Internet and changing views on the acceptability of abortion.

4. Insurance options might pop up that pay for transportation and housing to neighboring states for abortions. Just order an Uber car and submit the receipt to your insurance plan for reimbursement.

My point is that unlike the era in which Roe Vs. Wade first came into being, the Internet makes it far more practical to have state-specific abortion laws. Social media would make it difficult for employers to locate in abortion-limited states, and apps would make it easy to organize trips to neighboring states for abortions.

None of this describes a world that I prefer. I’m just thinking it through with you. This is a good time for my disclaimer.

Disclaimer: My personal opinion on abortion is that men should stay out of the debate and let women collectively decide what the laws should be. My reasoning is that women have an extra level of appreciation for the topic, more skin in the game, and they are generally better informed on this topic than men. Whatever women decide for abortion laws will be more credible than any decision that is watered down by the opinions of men. This is one of several ways in which I am more liberal than most liberals. 

You might want to buy my book because winter is coming.