Eros - what you said summarizes exactly the problem I have with Steve Pavlina. Respectfully, I couldn't disagree with you more. A lot of self-help is based entirely off of anecdotal evidence. When people respond (as they do to NLP) that when you create a controlled test, the results are poor, defenders of the practice will complain about western science. Now, scientific testing is not perfect, you don't get to the truth right away, sometimes you can be wrong for a long time. However, there are much, much bigger problems with using anecdotal evidence the way you just did, and the way Steve does. Anecdotal evidence is subject to confirmation bias, for one thing, so you remember the parts of the fortune that were right, and not the parts that were wrong.

The thing I never, ever see, is a discussion in the self help community any kind of self-examination around what methods they should be using to determine whether their methods work.

(04-24-2011 07:48 AM)Jon Wrote:  Eros - what you said summarizes exactly the problem I have with Steve Pavlina. Respectfully, I couldn't disagree with you more. A lot of self-help is based entirely off of anecdotal evidence. When people respond (as they do to NLP) that when you create a controlled test, the results are poor, defenders of the practice will complain about western science. Now, scientific testing is not perfect, you don't get to the truth right away, sometimes you can be wrong for a long time. However, there are much, much bigger problems with using anecdotal evidence the way you just did, and the way Steve does. Anecdotal evidence is subject to confirmation bias, for one thing, so you remember the parts of the fortune that were right, and not the parts that were wrong.

The thing I never, ever see, is a discussion in the self help community any kind of self-examination around what methods they should be using to determine whether their methods work.

I also think that personal development is personal, and that different things work for different people. What works for Steve is what works for him.

I personally respect Steve a lot because he's honest and real. I feel like most people who do personal development blogs write for an audience too much, and come off as fake, or only really handle it from the angle of tackling simple stuff that can make big changes.

A lot of his good or unique stuff comes from the new-agey angle, actually, and the rest is stuff you can find on almost any other personal development blog.

(04-24-2011 11:38 AM)mixmaven Wrote:  

(04-24-2011 07:48 AM)Jon Wrote:  Eros - what you said summarizes exactly the problem I have with Steve Pavlina. Respectfully, I couldn't disagree with you more. A lot of self-help is based entirely off of anecdotal evidence. When people respond (as they do to NLP) that when you create a controlled test, the results are poor, defenders of the practice will complain about western science. Now, scientific testing is not perfect, you don't get to the truth right away, sometimes you can be wrong for a long time. However, there are much, much bigger problems with using anecdotal evidence the way you just did, and the way Steve does. Anecdotal evidence is subject to confirmation bias, for one thing, so you remember the parts of the fortune that were right, and not the parts that were wrong.

The thing I never, ever see, is a discussion in the self help community any kind of self-examination around what methods they should be using to determine whether their methods work.

I also think that personal development is personal, and that different things work for different people. What works for Steve is what works for him.

Well that exactly is the problem. How do you know that something actually works? Because someone tells you it does for them? Sometimes it's obvious, but often people have to wade through streams of useless information for ages and try extremely esoteric practises (like EFT). It just does more harm than it helps.

(04-24-2011 06:07 AM)Eros Wrote:  Secondly, the title of his book isn't supposed to be smug I don't think. The point is that it's self-help for people who think they are too good/too smart for self-help, which is pretty much most people. And by too good, I don't mean they don't buy the books or dvd sets, I mean they're under the assumption that they're somehow different in the way self-help will work for them. We're all victims to this; thinking that we don't need to properly clarify our goals, or journal our interactions, or that we can somehow skip ahead, because we're unique. Mark and anyone else who's read Infinite Jest (which I'm now 700 pages into and loving), you'll probably remember how DFW talks about the process of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and how nearly everyone who enters it thinks they're too good for it's banal affirmations, it's lame gratitude exercises and countless platitudes. I think this is one thing Steve is really strong at; he's never thought he's too good to put in the hard yards on the really boring parts of self-help. So the title of the book is to show how it's aware of what people are often thinking when they apply self-help to their lives. I think it's also a hat-tip to the fact that if we truly employ our intelligence then we can do amazing things.

This is actually pretty good advice in itself; should be put on the first page of every self-help book.

(04-24-2011 10:18 PM)Happy Wrote:  

(04-24-2011 11:38 AM)mixmaven Wrote:  

(04-24-2011 07:48 AM)Jon Wrote:  Eros - what you said summarizes exactly the problem I have with Steve Pavlina. Respectfully, I couldn't disagree with you more. A lot of self-help is based entirely off of anecdotal evidence. When people respond (as they do to NLP) that when you create a controlled test, the results are poor, defenders of the practice will complain about western science. Now, scientific testing is not perfect, you don't get to the truth right away, sometimes you can be wrong for a long time. However, there are much, much bigger problems with using anecdotal evidence the way you just did, and the way Steve does. Anecdotal evidence is subject to confirmation bias, for one thing, so you remember the parts of the fortune that were right, and not the parts that were wrong.

The thing I never, ever see, is a discussion in the self help community any kind of self-examination around what methods they should be using to determine whether their methods work.

I also think that personal development is personal, and that different things work for different people. What works for Steve is what works for him.

Well that exactly is the problem. How do you know that something actually works? Because someone tells you it does for them? Sometimes it's obvious, but often people have to wade through streams of useless information for ages and try extremely esoteric practises (like EFT). It just does more harm than it helps.

I think you honestly just have to try it out for yourself. Some ways can also be radically different.

It could be physical exercise, changing your diet, journaling, NLP-type stuff, meditation, hanging out with people more, taking on a different job etc. that gets you going.

Joe Rogan is really cool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH1wevLdMRs
His podcast is really fucking awesome on his blog.

That's why coaching or an outside professional is really good for people who are stuck. Because a lot of finding the right stuff that will help you is based on who you are, and if you're just bouncing ideas off of yourself, you might not get the objectivity to know what to tweak.

Well this is great timing... Here's a post Steve just wrote called "Are you faking progress?". It only has anecdotal evidence, and it's certainly nice and vague, so you can tear holes in to it if you so choose. From my perspective this is a great post though. It's nothing groundbreaking, just a reminder to get you back on track, and it's communicated in a clear and precise way. When he talks about Study vs Results it really helped me clarify what is adding value to my life and furthering me towards my goals, and what is just another thought in my head and often just mental masturbation.

http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2011/04...-progress/

Joe Rogan is a complete revelation to me, the guy's actually really great to listen to.
I remember watching a documentary called 'the spirit molechule' which he presented (which looks into using dmt and ayahuasca and the benefits they have spiritually) and i'm thinking wtf is the guy from ufc doing presenting this?

. . . ah good times

I think these top ten blogs lists are pretty cool:

http://www.blogs.com/topten/top-10-blogs...your-life/

http://www.blogs.com/topten/top-10-blogs...own-terms/

Cheers

I highly recommend this blog :

http://theessentialmanguide.com

It's written by Robert Geller's assistant designer (a menswear fashion brand), packed with different tips, thoughts, (cooking, fashion, life, love etc...). Down to earth and modest.

(04-28-2011 05:32 AM)Gill Wrote:  I highly recommend this blog :

http://theessentialmanguide.com

It's written by Robert Geller's assistant designer (a menswear fashion brand), packed with different tips, thoughts, (cooking, fashion, life, love etc...). Down to earth and modest.

That's a great site. I just wasted 15 minutes on it. Also, I love that he lives in NY. Tons of awesome recs.

The only other blogs that I follow that aren't already listed are Tim Feriss' 4HWW blog and I read Tyler's articles on rsdnation.