If I asked you: how much of my articles you actually get… What would you say?

If I asked you: how much of my articles you actually get... What would you say?

Experiments and tests show that if you have the right attitude, high level of interest, and you are coherent: you can receive as much as 7% of what is being said. Word based communication.

Re-listening or re-reading the same thing won't improve the percentage much. Why? Because what you think is there replaces, effectively, what you hear or read the second time.

This is what is normal.

What is also normal is to believe that you got 100%. And for the speaker to think that you can get more than 7%.

I don't often put myself into the position of experiencing this directly... and every time I find out how little of what I said actually landed, I want to tear my hair out.

I am as often on the other side of the equation: and I have a lot more tolerance for myself getting mighty little from what I hear and what I read.

I am re-reading the ground breaking new book "Feelings" by Margoczi. I am reading it now in Hungarian. (I paid four times more for that... Makes no sense...) I find that I have glossed over what were technical terms the first time. I was looking for a grasp of the principles, and completely lost the details.

So this time I am clear I got nothing much of a whole lot... lol. 7%. It's both a lot and very little

So my idea that I'd be able to teach this to my students was based on an illusion... that I can teach what I never got.

This is a very frequent phenomenon, in my experience. People do a course, and want to turn around and teach it. Become a coach. Create their own programs.

In the Advanced Course in Landmark Education, there is a session, 2-3 hours long, maybe longer, Where the assignment is to work with one simple distinction, and take it to a level where you actually are able to say it with authenticity...

My observation, based on watching thousands of participants, that a square number of 1 in 100 is able to get to that level... but 99% of those lose it by the end of the day, or the latest by next day.

So if your experience is that your ability to learn is disappointing, you are at least honest with yourself. Or intelligent enough to know that you got mighty little for your efforts.

That 93% of what you think you got is b.s. or just simply "not that". Not what was said.

You could increase your learning effectiveness if you used common sense, but that is the rarest of the capacities for today's humans.

Common sense means: checking if what you got makes sense in different sizes of pictures and frames.

I worked as a waitress for a month after I got my degree in architecture. I often didn't use paper and pen to add up a tab, and sometimes I erred. I quoted 500 Hungarian money to a guy who had a few drinks and a few cups of espresso.

He paid. the tab should have been 50 Hungarian units of money... but he paid. He did not use common sense... though he probably wondered... but not enough.

I wasn't knocked awake until the end of my shift when I had a ton of money left after I paid for the total of my checks.

Using common sense falls in the category of a principle: trust but verify...

You either trust and can be duped, or you don't trust. Hardly anyone I know uses common sense to verify.

As a university student I increased my learning effectiveness by teaching what I just read/learned. We were a group of four girls, and we got together for a day or two of studying together before every exam. I was considered by them smart, because of the role I took on: teaching them. I got one big benefit from it, other than good grades: I actually still remember most of what we learned, while they all forgot it all.

What else can you do?

Another useful way to increase how much knowledge lands on you accurately, and how big a knowledge base you build: reading.

Books.

The more you read the more foundation you build.

Re-reading the same thing isn't the best way to go, even though I just shared that that is what I am doing.

I am doing it for two reasons: I am talking to the author in email, and I am very motivated to get closer to his knowledge level...

Second: I want to turn around and teach it. I just wished I still had the group of girls: I have not one person in my environment who is motivated to learn pretty much anything... unless it is personal and about themselves. For the sake of knowledge: not even one.

I am even having a hard time getting people to read Dr. Wallach's books, or watch his famous "Dead Doctors Don't Lie" presentation on youtube.

They want me to read, they want me to watch, and then just tell them the 2-minute version, the part that personally effects them.

When I say "they" I obviously mean you.

Wallace D. Wattles calls this "intellectually slothful".

He said it, not me.

Yesterday my Canadian friend sent me a link to an article on gizmodo... "The Untold Story of Napoleon Hill, the Greatest Self-Help Scammer of All Time" I put a sample of the article in the footnotes 1

Billions of people got hooked on the power of word, on creating the future, and other garden variety crap he taught.

Do you suppose it would have happened had people used common sense? I don't think so.

But it used this intellectual slothfulness of yours and increased it many-fold. Because it promised that you can get rich without working, you can get knowledge without learning, that you can become worth a damn just by wishing it.

OK, let's talk a little bit about the 67 steps program I use to raise your vibration. OK?

Tai Lopez is a guy who has read thousands of books, and managed to distill guidance, principles, etc. from them. Some correctly, some half correctly, some incorrectly.

His vibration is 170, which number shows that his map of reality doesn't match reality very well. His conclusions in different areas are way off.

And yet, when you use the program the way I suggest that you do, your life can get a huge boost from it. You can make up for decades of slothful living through this program.

How do I suggest that you listen? As if you were taking a shower. Or as if you were at the eye doctor, and in the dark room the doctor's flashlight would go from picture to picture on the wall.

Given that the truth value of what is says if only 30%, certain steps lower!, you want to pay attention to the directing aspect of his program, and not the LANDING aspect.

Those of my students that listen, and re-listen, transcribe, take notes, are getting the least benefit out of the program. Why? Because they go for the content and not the direction, the context.

When you listen for the context, your left brain is asleep... and allows your intelligent part of you to hear and get impressed.

And when you listen that way, you get almost 100% of what is being said, and can live from it.

It's not the easiest thing for humans, but it is possible, Some of my students are getting better at it.

You should try...

Footnotes


  1. The Untold Story of Napoleon Hill, the Greatest Self-Help Scammer of All Time

    Napoleon Hill is the most famous conman you’ve probably never heard of. Born into poverty in rural Virginia at the end of the 19th century, Hill went on to write one of the most successful self-help books of the 20th century: Think and Grow Rich. In fact, he helped invent the genre. But it’s the untold story of Hill’s fraudulent business practices, tawdry sex life, and membership in a New York cult that makes him so fascinating.

    That cult would become infamous in the late 1930s for trying to raise an “immortal baby.” But even those who know the story of Immortal Baby Jean may not know that the cult was inspired by Hill’s teachings, practically using his most famous work as their holy text. Don’t worry, the whole story of Napoleon Hill only gets weirder from there.

    Modern readers are probably familiar with the 2006 sensation The Secret, but the concepts in that book were essentially plagiarized from Napoleon Hill’s 1937 classic Think and Grow Rich, which has reportedly sold over 15 million copies to date. The big idea in both: The material universe is governed quite directly by our thoughts. If you simply visualize what you want out of life, those things and more will be delivered to you. Especially if those things involve money.

    The past few decades have been a profitable era for all sorts of self-help and business success books. Napoleon Hill blazed a trail for an entire industry. But Napoleon’s early work is seen as “the source” when people get deep into self-help and business success literature. Hill’s Think and Grow Rich is passed around in certain business and real estate circles like some kind of ancient text. In fact, when The Secret emerged on the scene in the mid-2000s, countless entrepreneurial writers would pen their own books, pointing to the works of Napoleon Hill as the true basis for what The Secret called the Law of Attraction.

    Continue reading
    Take a look at the comments as well... the scrambling, the protest... oy vey

Author: Sophie Benshitta Maven

award winning architect, magazine publisher, transformational and spiritual coach and teacher, self declared Avatar

5 thoughts on “If I asked you: how much of my articles you actually get… What would you say?”

  1. Dear Sophie,
    Thank you for the link to the untold story of Napoleon Hill.
    I haven’t read it yet, though a quick skim just now shows it has great promise. While I have read his books, I never met him.
    I do know a man who describes N.H. as “Uncle Nappy,” and have listened to his stories of “growing up on Uncle Nappy’s knee.”
    You might enjoy hearing a little of his story (video link below).
    I’ll be curious to know what your vibrational sense is after watching. I’ve sat in the front row (repeatedly) at these events, met all the main characters in this brief video, and have my own sense of what they’re doing (helping end the era of competition in business, and replacing it with cooperation).
    And now your link has me wondering about their work in the context of N.H.’s “Untold Story.”
    Thank you, as usual, for provoking further thought, introspection, and awareness.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdeL80Qm41E
    — Blair

  2. The video’s vibration is 140. And it has nothing to do with the reason I republished and recommended the article. This is not about a guy who found something on google about a good guy. No it’s about Napoleon Hill who corrupted generations of people because he, as all conmen do, sold an idea which is faulty, untrue, but very attractive to people who want to believe in miracles. Like you.

    But corrupting the world is not a win-win thing… And you protecting a criminal who corrupted your thinking so now you don’t feel like working, getting things done, doing things that don’t feel good to you, learning, reading… Please.

    Anyway, if this is what most people will answer, then I’ll close the comments, and maybe stop publishing articles, because then it means that the readers of my site are sworn enemies of what works, and only believe in the opposite of it.

    Common sense? hahahahaha

  3. ok, I listened to that video till the end.

    The idea that someone who was in jail is a bad person therefore one should not listen to them is what is being addressed. I believe that people make mistakes, and it doesn’t mean much about them now. I have done bad things, and it said something about me then, but not now.

    So if you could do yourself a favor, and to all of us, read my articles, read the article (do not just skim it) and get that it is not an attack on the person, it is an attack on what he taught and you gobbled up.

    That there is a “secret” that if you use it, wealth, love, happiness will come to you.

    The Law of Attraction is a scam, and the Power of the mind, and every version of it is a scam too.

    And that is why I got angry, that is why I am angry, because it doesn’t work, it can’t work, because it is based on a lie.

  4. Dear Sophie,

    Wow, that triggered some stuff. So sorry;
    not my intention.

    The Law of Attraction is a scam, and
    the Power of the mind, and every
    version of it is a scam too.

    I’d say this is more accurate than not.

    Less so that I “gobbled up” Napoleon Hill.

    (I’m about to share my process, which is
    intended to help me. Feel free to delete!)

    When reading I am sorting for thoughts that resonate, and noticing ideas that irritate me.

    Even when the author offers many ideas that do not resonate, I still may find a few that do. Those I ponder, rework with my own,
    sometimes internalize, then later share.

    The ideas that irritate, trigger me, or provoke my anger can be things I may need to look at in myself, or just let them pass by.

    Those ideas may indeed be absolute rubbish that corrupts hopeful people who don’t know with certainty how everything works in this vast universe.

    *I know you already know all of this!* When I
    write or speak, I’m doing so (mostly) for my
    own education, continually attempting to
    clarify my thinking, so see my actions exactly
    as they are, to hear my words and notice the
    influence they have on myself and others, and
    to feel what I do not feel. I’m continually
    working to create new habits and systems
    that better serve myself and others.

    This is path is not straight like the arrow.

    Some authors I’ve read put service to self
    above service to others. When I was younger,
    it was more difficult for me to feel the
    difference.

    There have been many con artists to be wary of; this one was dangerous psychologically and physically. Have you encountered him?

    https://www.amazon.com/Charlatan-Americas-Dangerous-Huckster-Flimflam/dp/0307339890/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=emp0b-20

    http://www.rense.com/general81/amcu.htm

    Paying attention to how con games are run
    may help me spot and avoid them.

    What I most seek now though is ever more
    clarity and brevity in service to others.

    The spiritual battle being done on this plane
    is serious business. Those who are focused on
    controlling others with fear and pain can only
    triumph to the extent that we abdicate our
    sovereign connection to source. This I know…

    Sending love to you,

    — Blair

  5. OK Blair. first off: I appreciate that you didn’t come at me with a knife.

    Now, I am answering the most important non-question: what do you resonate with?

    I also have an article on it https://www.yourvibration.com/17235/truth-value/ from two years ago…

    But here is the gist of it: you resonate with what you are. That is the definition of resonating. As a musician you probably know that more than most.

    Now, what are you? On what level?

    We could say that your vibrational number is your resonance… It is an important number. the lower your vibration the further you are from having an accurate map of reality in your brain. So the lower your vibration the more you resonate with untrue, unfair, unjust, things.

    So, surprisingly, the negative, the unpleasant, the conflicting feelings are more beneficial to you than the pleasant re-confirming feelings.

    I have done my entire growth through unpleasant, confronting feelings that I considered guidance.

    So your methodology of looking for resonance has the opposite effect than what you hope for.

    When you are looking for a scam, get fascinated by a scam, your whole resonance is to fear and titillation…

    No amount of “love” you send will change your vibration… I am so very sorry. It’s nasty work to raise your vibration, and you don’t resonate with it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *