Jordan Peterson on how to know if someone is right for you:
1. Living together first doesn't protect you. the evidence points the other way. people who live together are more likely to get divorced, not less.
2. the real test isn't love. it's whether you can negotiate. you should know someone long enough to know you two can tell each other the truth and negotiate. that's the most important part of a relationship.
3. so talk about the boring things. who buys the groceries. who pays the bills. who cooks and when. who does which chores and is it laid out fair. you either sit down like a conscious, articulate couple and negotiate it, or you bring your unconscious assumptions in and clash where they don't match.
4. attraction still matters. if you have that massive erotic attraction, you're unbelievably fortunate and you should do everything you can to maintain it. but that takes real effort and will. and you have to ally it with maturity. what does this look like at the level of detail. money. where you live. careers. children. in-laws.
5. commitment comes first, not after. unless you've made a lifetime commitment, one you're not going to back out of, you won't take the relationship seriously enough to make it high quality. an idea he took from reading carl jung. "shackled together" is a cynical way of putting it. it's more like an unbreakable bond that makes both people better.
6. the hard part is telling the truth. and the truth is generally a horrible thing. it's easy to tell the truth when everyone wants to hear what you have to say. it's very difficult when no one wants to hear it, least of all yourself.
7. you're braiding one rope. you have the strands of your life, your partner has theirs, and you tie them together into something stronger. then you undertake massive adventures. a household. joint careers. each other's mental and physical health. kids. all of it very, very challenging.
8. marriage and child rearing get a bad rap in our culture and he thinks that's a catastrophe. even if you're highly career oriented, that's two thirds of your life. his house has been a sanctuary, and that's part of why he's been effective at work.
9. and it decides your second half. he's 55. both his kids just got engaged in the same month. he might have 40 more years, and now there are grandchildren coming. all that negotiating early is what buys you something to advance into.
Conor Neill: "18 years of school trained you to ruin conversations"
"You finish your pitch and the customer says, 'Your product is too expensive!' You arrive home a few minutes late, your partner says, 'You are always late.' There's a dirty plate left on the table 'You never wash the dishes.' What do you say in this moment?"
Neill explains the problem:
"Most of you, me included, went through 14 years of school where we were taught one way to respond to questions. Teacher asks, 'How do you spell cats?' Student: 'C-A-T.' Teacher asks, 'What is osmosis?' Student explains in detail. For 14 years, you've been taught to give answers to questions. If you went to university, you probably had another 3 or 4 years of giving answers to questions."
Here's what that does to you:
"In real life in persuasion, in getting to what the other person is really about, what their needs really are, the worst thing you can do is give an answer to a question."
He gives examples:
"If someone says, 'Your product is too expensive,' and you say, 'No it's not! It's only €1,000'; you've lost every chance to understand what else is behind their reasoning. If you get home and your partner says, 'You're always late!' and you say, 'No, no, no, Tuesday I was definitely here on time', you're gonna have a crap weekend."
Neill explains why this happens:
"When your partner says, 'You're always late,' emotion goes up. And what happens? The thinking part disconnects. The way to make someone stupider is to insult them, object to them, tell them they are wrong. When you're asked a question, there's an emotional reaction, and the higher emotion goes, the lower thinking goes."
He continues:
"If you don't practice this response, you're not going to be able to do it in the moment. If you don't practice repeatedly how you'll respond to 'You're always late,' 'You never wash the dishes,' 'Your product is too expensive,' 'Your competitor is better,' 'You failed us 3 years ago,' 'I don't trust your company', you're not going to be able to do it in the heat of the moment."
Here's what to do instead:
"When you are asked a question or given an objection, I want you to say: 'I understand.' And repeat in your words what they're saying. Then give an open question back."
He demonstrates:
"'Your product is too expensive!' → 'I understand that money is an important factor for you. What other criteria will be used in making this decision?'"
Neill calls this "Conversation Aikido":
"Martial arts are about using the energy and force of the opponent against them. In Judo, if someone punches you, you pull their arm and allow the energy to keep flowing. In Aikido, the concept is you go toward the punch. You go toward the energy. If someone punches you, if someone asks you a question, if someone objects, the Aikido method is to go toward them and see the world from their view."
He explains how to practice:
"'You're always late!' → 'I understand you feel frustrated.' 'I understand you feel let down.' You'll have to work on this quite a few times over the next 10 years to find the set of words that captures what the other person feels, what's behind it. Then ask: 'What can we do now?' 'What happened during the day?' 'What would you like to talk about?'"
Neill shares what happens when you don't do this:
"When a client says 'You're too expensive' and you say 'No, we're not!' you learn nothing about who else they're considering, what other criteria are important, what process they've gone through, who else is involved in the decision."
He closes with a guarantee:
"By giving the answer, we shut down the possibility of hearing what's really going on in the other person's mind. But if you say 'I understand,' accept the energy coming from the other person, and give back an open question, I guarantee that if you do it 4 times, the answer to your 4th open question begins to be the real underlying need, issue, or interest of the person you're listening to."
Elon Musk explains his 5-step process for running companies:
"First, make your requirements less dumb.
Your requirements are definitely dumb. It does not matter who gave them to you.
It's particularly dangerous if a smart person gave you the requirements because you might not question them enough. Everyone's wrong no matter who you are.
Everyone's wrong some of the time. So make your requirements less dumb. Then try very hard to delete the part or process.
This is actually very important. If you're not occasionally adding things back in, you are not deleting enough.
The bias tends to be very strongly towards let's add this part or process step in case we need it.
But you can basically make in-case arguments for so many things and for a rocket that is trying to be the first fully reusable rocket.
There's never been a fully reusable rocket. People don't understand.
This is like the holy grail of rocketry. So you've got to delete the part or process step. Super important.
You can't hedge your bets. That's why the grid funds, for example, do not fall down because that's a whole extra mechanism that we don't need.
Also, whatever requirement or constraint you have, it must come with a name, not a department.
Because you can't ask the department. You have to ask a person. That person who's putting forward their requirement or constraint must agree that they must take responsibility for that requirement.
Otherwise, you can have a requirement that basically an intern two years ago randomly came up with off the cuff and they're not even at the company anymore.
These things are often just way more silly than you think. So step one, make your requirements less dumb.
Step two, delete the part or process step.
If you're not adding things back in 10% of the time, you're clearly not deleting enough.
And then only the third step is simplify or optimize.
The third step, not the first step. The reason it's the third step is because possibly the most common error of a smart engineer is to optimize a thing that should not exist.
Everyone's been trained in high school and college that you've got to answer the question.
Convergent logic. So you can't tell the professor your question is dumb. You'll get a bad grade.
You have to answer the question. So everyone's basically, without knowing it, they've got a mental straitjacket on.
They'll work on optimizing the thing that should simply not exist.
And then finally, you get to step four, which is accelerate cycle time.
You're moving too slowly, go faster.
But don't go faster until you have worked on the other three things first.
You can always make things go faster.
And then the final step is automate.
Now, I've personally made the mistake of going backwards on all five steps multiple times.
Literally, I automated, accelerated, simplified, and then deleted.
One example I've talked about before is there were these fiberglass mats on top of the Model 3 battery pack that were in between the floor pan and the battery.
And it was at one point choking the battery pack production line.
And I was basically living on the battery pack production line trying to fix the line.
It was choking the entire Model 3 production program. So the first mistake was I tried to fix the automation, like make the robot better.
So automating was a mistake. Then accelerating was a mistake. Then optimizing was a mistake.
And finally, I said, what the hell are these mats for?
And I asked the battery safety team, what are these mats for?
Are they for fire protection or something?
They said, no, they're for noise and vibration.
Then I asked an NVH, a noise, vibration, harshness team, what's it for? They said fire safety.
So literally, it was like being in a Dilbert cartoon.
Actually, I feel like I'm in a Dilbert cartoon quite frequently.
So then finally, OK, great, let's try a car with the fiberglass mats and without.
And they put a microphone to both and see if you can tell the difference.
In fact, I was like, which one is which?
So we just deleted them and just bypassed this $2 million robot cell.
It was just a complete pile of nonsense."
@AfricaFactsZone Our health and life are in trouble now. They are on a kill-them-all campaign. Pls guys, don't take any vaccine for your kids, or vaccines for the next pandemic 2.0 (coming soon (ljust like covid)) or drugs from this programme.
Eat healthily & stay safe!