Self Helper??


Brant Gaede

Recommended Posts

Does Objectivism agree with that list?

Objectivism doesn't post on OL.

Michael banned him for trolling.

One way to knowledge is through Objectivism, not into it to "full stop."

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just saw this.

I like Tony Robbins.

I have a whole theory about how his needs are arrived at (or Rand's three supreme values and seven cardinal virtues, or Nathaniel's six pillars, or Covey's seven habits, and all the rest). It involves neuroplasticity, neural pathways and it's how self-help works. But that's for another day.

Self-help does work, though, if you work it.

I know for a fact the six needs Tony uses work pretty well for some people. For instance, this young lady, Zoë Chance, at TEDxMillRiver (a regional TED Talk):

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Objectivism agree with that list?

I can answer that, I bumped into him just this morning.

Objectivism disapproves.

Objectivism says do not think for yourself, he will tell us what's right for us.

Objectivism warns he will tolerate no other gods before him, especially Reality, Reason, Self-Interest and Self-Help.

Ooo-kay, Big O!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
On 11/16/2014 at 8:17 PM, Brant Gaede said:

It was an interesting read, here are some of my thoughts and criticisms about it:

Need 1: Certainty/Comfort:

Robbins:  "The first human need is the need for Certainty. It’s our need to feel in control and to know what’s coming next so we can feel secure. It’s the need for basic comfort, the need to avoid pain and stress, and also to create pleasure. Our need for certainty is a survival mechanism. It affects how much risk we’re willing to take in life—in our jobs, in our investments, and in our relationships."

I think there is more comfort in reality, the more a person knows about it (certainty), the more comfortable they can become.

 

Need 2: Uncertainty/Variety

Robbins:  "Let me ask you a question: Do you like surprises?

If you answered “yes,” you’re kidding yourself! You like the surprises you want. The ones you don’t want, you call problems! But you still need them to put some muscle in your life. You can’t grow muscle—or character—unless you have something to push back against."

No, I don't like surprises!  Strange Robbins would first state that certainty is a need, and then uncertainty is a need.  I personally do not believe that a person needs to know hardships or 'problems' to be happy.  Part of wisdom is to learn from others, so that a person doesn't necessarily have to have hardships or 'problems' for themselves.  For this one I'd say happiness is the goal, not hardships, then happiness.

 

Need 3: Significance

Robbins:  "We all need to feel important, special, unique, or needed. So how do some of us get significance? You can get it by earning billions of dollars, or collecting academic degrees—distinguishing yourself with a master’s or a PhD. You can build a giant Twitter following. Or you can go on The Bachelor or become the next Real Housewife of Orange County. Some do it by putting tattoos and piercings all over themselves and in places we don’t want to know about.

You can get significance by having more or bigger problems than anybody else. “You think your husband’s a dirt bag, take mine for a day!” Of course, you can also get it by being more spiritual (or pretending to be).

Spending a lot of money can make you feel significant, and so can spending very little. We all know people who constantly brag about their bargains, or who feel special because they heat their homes with cow manure and sunlight. Some very wealthy people gain significance by hiding their wealth. Like the late Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-Mart and for a time the richest man in America, who drove around Bentonville, Arkansas, in his old pickup, demonstrating he didn’t need a Bentley—but of course, he did have his own private fleet of jets standing by.

Significance is also a money maker—that’s where my dear friend Steve Wynn has made his fortune. The man who made Las Vegas what it is today knows people will pay for anything they believe is “the best,” anything that makes them feel special, unique or important, anything that makes them stand out from the crowd. He provides the most exclusive, luxurious experiences imaginable in his casinos and hotels—they are truly magnificent and unmatched in the world."

Seems he's trying to say that a person's sense of significance comes from others...  I disagree with that one, but Keating might agree with it  :)

 

Need 4: Love & Connection

Robbins:  "The fourth basic need is Love and Connection. Love is the oxygen of life; it’s what we all want and need most. When we love completely we feel alive, but when we lose love, the pain is so great that most people settle on connection, the crumbs of love. You can get that sense of connection or love through intimacy, or friendship, or prayer, or walking in nature. If nothing else works, you can get a dog."

I see where he went with this, but I don't believe that love is "what we all want and need the most".  He misses that what we need the most is a Self, and self-love, so that people can have something to love.

 

Need 5: Growth

Robbins:  "If you’re not growing, you’re dying. If a relationship is not growing, if a business is not growing, if you’re not growing, it doesn’t matter how much money you have in the bank, how many friends you have, how many people love you—you’re not going to experience real fulfillment. And the reason we grow, I believe, is so we have something of value to give."

Talking about stagnation here... but then wraps it up with altruism.

 

Need 6: Contribution

Robbins:  "Corny as it may sound, the secret to living is giving. Life’s not about me; it’s about we. Think about it, what’s the first thing you do when you get good or exciting news? You call somebody you love and share it. Sharing enhances everything you experience."

Yikes!  First sentence is altruism, second sentence is 'others'.  The rest leave out self-esteem.

Objectivism disapproves!  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

I think there is more comfort in reality, the more a person knows about it (certainty), the more comfortable they can become.

Korben,

How certain are you of that?

Do you think it's important to be certain of that?

Or do you prefer intellectual comfort instead?

:evil:  :) 

5 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

No, I don't like surprises!

Actually your nucleus accumbens says differently. Without surprises, your brain goes into habituation and doesn't pay attention. With no surprises at all, your nucleus accumbens goes apeshit. What that feels like is you get bored. And we all know that boredom is akin to mental pain.

5 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

Seems he's trying to say that a person's sense of significance comes from others...  I disagree with that one, but Keating might agree with it

We do get meaning from others, we all have a need to know we are important to others. What does Rand's formulation, "You are my highest value," mean if not meaning?

Robbins (just like Randians) tend to treat this need, which is empirically demonstrable, as either-or with selfishness. Not all of the time, but most of the time and whenever they use generalities. But the truth is we need both. There's lots of fuzzy thinking out there about this.

Since we have a strong feel-good reaction to oxytocin spikes and these almost always involve others or other living beings we nurture, altruists tend to extrapolate this to abstractions and preach selfishness is bad.

Rand was very suspicious of the constant self-abnegation crap that came from this and worried about the feel-good reaction from caring about others being turned a political weapon, which it has been (albeit she did not know anything about the neuroscience). Notice that she attacked the abstract meaning (Compte's view of altruism) rather that what people feel under different circumstances. One of the reasons is intellectual distance. It is much easier to debunk an abstraction and go ballistic on that than it is to look at something right in front of you and say it doesn't exist or is evil when you know it isn't.

5 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

I see where he went with this, but I don't believe that love is "what we all want and need the most".  He misses that what we need the most is a Self, and self-love, so that people can have something to love.

I don't see where he excluded self-love. In fact, since I have watched, listened to and read a lot of Robbins, I can state absolutely he believes you have to love yourself. His whole schtick about empowerment is to become a better person and that starts with self-love.

On growth I have no comment. He's right. Living things are either growing or dying. They only become stagnant with death.

5 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

Yikes!  First sentence is altruism, second sentence is 'others'.  The rest leave out self-esteem.

The psychological need to share is not altruism. Nor is the urge to give.

This is a longer discussion, but oversimplifications are not helpful except as self-help tools to get you moving--or as straw men to defend against in the name of some ideology and/or tribe.

Robbins does the self-help thing well so I cut him a lot of slack. Just look at the results of his students. Would you blank out those folks and their results? However, I agree with you (if such is your meaning) that Robbins is not a deep thinker.

He works mostly from an NLP basis, which means observing someone successful, modeling what they do, testing things out until you see which of your observations work, then teaching the successful models. This is why the theoretical part can be (and often is) sloppy, but his techniques still get results. In fact, when something he tries doesn't get results, he abandons it.

A modern name for how NLP works is growth hacking or split testing, although I don't think the geeks and nerds in Silicon Valley identify with NLP because of all the garbage out there. Still, the process is the same and no one can argue against results in reality (that is, unless you discuss things online in O-Land. :evil: :) --> That's a quip... :) )

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2014 at 1:57 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I just saw this.

I like Tony Robbins.

I have a whole theory about how his needs are arrived at (or Rand's three supreme values and seven cardinal virtues, or Nathaniel's six pillars, or Covey's seven habits, and all the rest). It involves neuroplasticity, neural pathways and it's how self-help works. But that's for another day.

Self-help does work, though, if you work it.

I know for a fact the six needs Tony uses work pretty well for some people. For instance, this young lady, Zoë Chance, at TEDxMillRiver (a regional TED Talk):

 

Michael

Can you fit all this with the Mazlow Hierarchy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Can you fit all this with the Mazlow Hierarchy?

From what I just read of the MH it's very much more sophisticated without any significant differences because of the plasticity of the Hierarchy. The MH is for thinking and the other--TR--for acting. It's all a bunch of needs.

--Brant

this is not a comment on the video which I don't have time to watch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now