Is Putin a madman hellbent on nuking the world, or is Ukraine's friendliness towards the west threatened Russia's security? After listening to this episode, you won't need Twidiots to tell you what to think. You'll learn to use models such as probabilistic thinking, circle of competence, and reversibility, to decide for yourself.

As always, we're building a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Resources

1. TK News by Matt Taibi

2. Wag the Dog

3. Glenn Greenwald Substack

4. “When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will.” ― Frederic Bastiat

Mental Models

1. Pick your trusted sources

2. Probabilistic thinking

3. Heuristics

4. Long-Tail Risks

5. Past performance is not a predictor of future performance

6. Don’t let a good crisis go to waste

7. Incentives matter

8. Circle of competence

9. Accountability

10. Reversibility

11. Second-order consequences

12. Compound decisions

13. Decision nexus

14. Short-term vs long-term thinking

15. Competency crisis

Top Takeaways

1. We need to learn how to navigate through an information war.

2. Heuristics are useful shortcuts or rules of thumb to help us make decisions. To use them effectively, you must understand when your heuristics are wrong.

3. We don’t need to consider every last bit of information. Our models must, however, incorporate the information most critical to reaching a strong conclusion.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan and Scott on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott is also on Instagram and rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.
Feel free to email him with questions, comments, or suggestions.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

This week, Stefan and Scott welcome back Myron and Jeremy of Mental Supermodels. This time we hash out our beginner experiences with cryptocurrencies. We cover how our thinking has evolved from our first forays into the world of digital currencies to where we stand today. This episode touches on investment philosophies, hits and misses in crypto, and mental models we use when dipping a toe in this dynamic and often times confusing world.

As always, we're building a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Guest Information

1. Mental Supermodels

2. Myron Weber LinkedIn

3. Jeremy Thomas LinkedIn

4. Northwood Advisors

Resources

1. Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

2. The Byzantine Generals Problem

3. The Business Blockchain: Promise, Practice, and Application of the Next Internet Technology, by William Mougayar

4. Andreas M. Antonopoulos, The Bitcoin & Open Blockchain Expert

5. Ukraine Legalizes Bitcoin (BTC) and Cryptocurrencies

6. Russian Ministry proposes to legalize and tax Bitcoin mining

7. Is It Possible To Have A Quantum Resistant Cryptocurrency?

8. Mochimo – Quantum Resistant Cryptocurrency Review

9. Pros and cons of dollar-cost averaging

10. PlanB @100trillionUSD

11. Mental Supermodels Ep 1: Boundaries and the 6 Stages

Top Takeaways

1. Fear of missing out or letting your emotions drive you into a market often leads to losses. Having a model or strategy in place to sidestep emotional decisions is a must for all investors.

2. The crypto culture is a driving force to achieving self-sovereignty. The community driven ecosystem surrounding crypto has attracted innovative people.

3. Crypto’s value is in bringing value to the end consumer by cutting out the middleman.

4. Because you have success at something once doesn’t mean you’re an expert.

5. Beware of authority without credibility.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan and Scott on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott is also on Instagram and rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.

Feel free to email him with questions, comments, or suggestions.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

Stephan is a brilliant, articulate libertarian legal scholar who explains why the mainstream notion that intellectual property spurs innovation is wrong. He dives in by telling us why IP laws are simply government-issued monopolies that actually impede innovation. He explains why removing IP laws would make us more prosperous. And closes by discussing other innovative ways creators can profit without protectionist laws.

As always, we're building a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Guest Information

1. Stephan’s Website

2. Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Libertarian Theory and Applications

3. Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom

Top Takeaways

1. Intellectual Property (IP) is a body of law whose stated purpose is to protect a specific type of private property, such as inventions and creative works but is really a grant of monopoly power by the state.

2. Instead of spurring innovation and creativity, the monopolistic nature of IP laws stifles new creative output.

3. IP laws could be repealed today, and entrepreneurs would fill the void with new, innovative ways to earn money from their creations.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan and Scott on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott is also on Instagram and rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.

Feel free to email him with questions, comments, or suggestions.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

In Episode 47, Stefan and Scott recorded a short segment on Bitcoin Maximalism. Their friends Myron and Jeremy of Mental Supermodels recently released an episode that built on those initial insights.

Today, Stefan and Scott returned the favor by adding their thoughts to Myron and Jeremy's. They define Bitcoin Maximalism then discuss its advantages and disadvantages and whether it's the best philosophy for realizing Bitcoin's promise of self-sovereignty.

As always, we're building a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Resources

1. Mental Supermodels Episode 17. Maximalism: response to Mentally Unscripted

2. The Fight For Bitcoin: Water’s Warm Maximalism

3. Mike Lindell Claims Banks Want to Cut Ties With Him Over 'Reputation Risk'

4. The 'Make Bitcoin Legal Tender' Momentum Grows

5. SWIFT and the Weaponization of the U.S. Dollar

6. Up Only

Top Takeaways

1. A 3-level framework for slotting maximalists into your information architecture is based on openness to new ideas

   1. Convictionalist: A strong, actively pursued opinion but is open to other ideas.

   2. Maximalist: A strong opinion and is unwilling to change.

   3. Toxic Maximalist: A strong opinion and actively puts down other views.

2. Self-sovereignty is crypto’s great promise. Can we do that with only Bitcoin or do we need other blockchain technologies playing in the same sandbox?

3. What does the game theory around Bitcoin look like? If we focus solely on Bitcoin, are we opening ourselves up to a government or other central authority exerting control over the network?

4. Bitcoin is criticized for not innovating fast enough but it’s moving at the speed needed to meet current demands.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan and Scott on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott is also on Instagram and rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.

Feel free to email him with questions, comments, or suggestions.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

In this episode, I will explain some of the significant theories of judicial review and explain why it doesn’t matter.

As always, we're building a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com. 

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there. 

Resources

1. What Does ‘Constitutional Interpretation’ Mean, Anyway?

Top Takeaways

1. Will we ever be able to cut through the noise and agree on the COVID situation? We likely won’t ever reach a level where we have separated the bare facts about COVID from the fiction, let alone agree on what those facts mean when viewed through our individual moral lens. And that’s okay as long as we arrive at our own personal truth honestly.

2. OSHA withdrew its vaccine mandate, which is good news, but it’s not necessarily the last time we’ll hear about it.

3. The U.S. Supreme Court isn’t a collection of unbiased legal scholars coldly reviewing constitutional questions when it comes down to it. The justices are as free to bend to their morals as any of us. Theories of Constitutional interpretation aren’t hard and fast rules the justices must apply but are often a mechanism for justifying decisions after the fact.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan and Scott on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott is also on Instagram and rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.

Feel free to email him with questions, comments, or suggestions.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

I start the podcast by explaining administrative law and why an executive agency like OSHA can make laws despite the Constitution not granting law-making authority to the executive branch. I also briefly recap on how we got to this point in the vaccine mandate case and what's to come.

With the background material out the way, I give my thoughts on the well-publicized factual errors by some Justices and what they mean to the case.

I then dive a little deeper and explain that the issue in the OSHA case wasn't whether a government agency could mandate a vaccine for an estimated 85 million people. It was which level of government can do so, leaving out any contemplation that the individual is best positioned to make their healthcare choices.

Finally, I wade back into the discussion I started a few episodes ago about the rule of law and why the law is subjective.

This was my first solo-podcast episode. While it certainly has its warts, I enjoyed doing it and hope to bring a different perspective to the Supreme Court's ruling on the OSHA vaccine mandate.

As always, we're building a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Resources

1. National Federation of Independent Business, et al., Applicants v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, et al

Top Takeaways

1. Justices bring their biases and outside facts into the cases the Supreme Court hears.

2. The central question in the OSHA vaccine mandate case came down to which level of government can mandate a vaccine for 65 million people. None of the majority, concurring, or dissenting opinions contemplated individual liberty and letting the people make healthcare choices for themselves.

3. Because language is vague, we must interpret laws. This reality means that law is subjective, not objective.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan and Scott on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott is also on Instagram and rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.

Feel free to email him with questions, comments, or suggestions.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

Podcast theme music by Transistor.fm. Learn how to start a podcast here.

An inductive generalization is when we draw a conclusion about a population based on what we observe in a sample.

For example, we're making an inductive generalization if we say that all swans are white because every swan we've ever seen is white.

While this conclusion may sound reasonable, it's flawed, so we must be careful when making decisions based on an inductive generalization.

We haven't seen every swan that's ever been, is, or will be alive. There could be a black, red, green, or blue swan out there somewhere. And all it takes is one non-white swan to prove our conclusion false.

A hasty generalization is an informal fallacy where we conclude something about a population based on insufficient evidence. We jump to a conclusion without considering all the relevant variables.

Because we see two white swans is not enough evidence to conclude that all swans in the world are white. But, if we observe nine white swans out of a population of ten swans, we are on somewhat firmer ground in concluding that the last swan is also white.

To keep a hasty generalization from leading us to a wrong decision, look at the sample size and how well the sample represents the population. A large sample size that mirrors the larger population will give us more confidence that our generalization is accurate.

Eric is an intelligent, caring person. He shares with us his strategies for gaining the trust of people who are often uncomfortable sharing their stories. We discuss the importance of rapport and preparation. We also talk about how Eric knows when to push harder during an interview and when to let up. It’s an excellent conversation for anyone wanting to know more about drawing difficult stories out of people.

As always, we’re building a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com. 

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Guest Information

1. The Eric Chow Empowers Podcast

2. Eric’s Twitter

Resources

1. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, by Yuval Noah Harari

2. Slaughterhouse-Five, by Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

3. Breakfast of Champions, by Kurt Vonnegut Jr.    

Mental Models

1. Hanlon’s Razor

2. The reptile brain

Top Takeaways

1. Stories of overcoming adversities are some of the most memorable stories. Conversely, stories that lack sincerity and focus on getting attention for the storytelling instead of helping others are the least memorable.

2. The first 10 to 15 minutes of the interview are key. During this time, the interviewer must get the storyteller relaxed and comfortable to build trust and rapport.

3. Preparation is important for an interviewer to draw a deep, sincere story out of someone.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott has jumped on the Gettr bandwagon and is also on DeSo and Instagram. He rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

Podcast theme music by Transistor.fm. Learn how to start a podcast here.

No podcast is complete without a year-end review. In episode 50, Scott and Stefan share their favorite ideas and tools from 2021 including the commonplace book, on-demand newsletters, and a confidence crisis.

Tune in here.

Mental Upgrade | Fighting Mental Jujutsu

There are over 1,000 styles of martial arts according to the ever-reliable internet.

Jujutsu may be the most devastating.

Originating in Japan between the 8th and 15th centuries as a technique for close combat on the battlefield, Jujutsu relies on a counterintuitive principle to defeat opponents: the enemy’s strength is their weakness.

Rather than matching force or exploiting your opponent’s defenses, you manipulate their force against them. In other words, the enemy's strength is converted into the weapon that defeats them.

With lethal results.

Converting physical strength into a weakness applies equally to your mind.

Your Hidden Mental Weaknesses

As you mature, your mind develops shortcuts for solving problems or making decisions as a way of doing more with less energy.

For example, you may ignore interesting news reports from news stations unaligned to your political mindset ("That's on Fox, it must be manipulated").

These are called "Heuristics". And, whether you know it or not, you use them all the time.

The Availability Heuristic is one example.

The Availability Heuristic operates on the notion that if something can be recalled, it must be important, or at least more important than alternative solutions which are not as readily recalled.

Subsequently, under the availability heuristic, people tend to heavily weigh their judgments toward more recent information, making new opinions biased toward that latest news.

The more you hear a topic, the easier it is to recall it. The easier it is to recall it, the more important it seems.

And this psychological truth can be exploited.

Let's explore one example that hits home for all readers: Democracy and Citizens.

A democracy demands informed citizens to make choices at the ballot box. And "good" citizens feel the desire to stay informed.

Your desire to stay "informed" or "knowledgeable", a strength for the informed citizen, becomes the exact tool an opponent uses to shape your thinking about what is important.

Imagine reading 13 stories on Russian influence into the 2016 elections AND being asked "What is the number one issue facing America’s voting process?"

Or reading multiple articles about the start of new solar and wind farms and asked "What are the best sources of renewable energy on the planet?"

Is there any guess to how someone would respond to these questions? Your mind is tuned to give an unsurprising answer, reinforced by the many articles on the topic.

You need to learn how to neutralize the attack.

Fight Fire With Water...

Like other mental biases, being aware of the phenomenon is the start.

But the real trick is hitting the "CTRL+ALT+DELETE" function when the mental bias software fires up.

For most, a well-worded question quickly disrupts the processing of the Availability Heuristic, causing one to challenge perceived importance.

Questions you can ask include

• If I hadn't read these articles, how important would I rate this matter?

• How is what I have recently heard or watched informing my opinion?

• What context (assumptions, base rates, trends, etc.) could be included but isn't?

This list isn't exhaustive. And you should make up your own set of questions that are easy to recall and effectively pause errant mental sub-routines.

But until then, feel free to use these.

And remember - they expect you to be ignorant or to use brute force to fight back. Surprise them. Think better.

The Easy, Fast, Fun Way to Never Argue in 2022.

Go to sleep for 365 days….

Or learn how to easily steer any discussion in a productive manner with powerful new conversation skills.

Learn how right here

As always, we’re building want to build a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com. 

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Resources

1. Obsidian

2. How to Take Smart Notes: One Simple Technique to Boost Writing, Learning and Thinking – for Students, Academics and Nonfiction Book Writers, by Sönke Ahrens

3. Where Good Ideas Come from: The Natural History of Innovation, by Steven Johnson

4. Substack

5. The Myth of the Rule of Law, by John Hasnas

6. The Anarchist Handbook, by Michael Malice

7. Anarchy and the Law: The Political Economy of Choice, by Edward P. Stringham

8. Vokes v. Arthur Murray, Inc. (Scott incorrectly referred to this case as the Fred Astair case in the podcast)

9. Mentally Unscripted Ep42 – How to Stop Fearing the Decentralized Tomorrow (crossover with Mental Supermodels)

10. Reactance

11. When Safety Proves Dangerous (Farnam Street)

12. New to KT Tape?

13. Mentally Unscripted Ep48 – Is Democracy the Opiate of the Masses? with Myron Weber

14. Mentally Unscripted Ep33 - Hubris and Misaligned Incentives: Mental Models in a Time of War

Mental Models

1. Reactance

2. Learn how to learn

3. Risk assessment

4. Base rates

5. Asking the best questions

6. Paradox of safety

7. Start with the end in mind

8. Institutional capture

9. Incentives

10. Crisis of competence

11. Accountability

12. Self-preservation

Top Takeaways

1. Obsidian is a tool that can take your note-taking to the next level.

2. Substack is a good tool for sharing content such as articles, podcasts, and newsletters. The Mentally Unscripted Substack page is the hub of the Mentally Unscripted empire.

3. The rule of law is the principle that we are a nation of laws, not of men so that all people are subject to the same laws. But this principle is a myth.

4. Reactance is the reaction to rules, regulations, etc. that threaten or eliminate specific freedoms.

5. Base rates are an important technique to help us assess risk.

6. How you go about learning something is an important aspect of learning.

7. We are witnessing a crisis of competence across institutions where they are unable to execute their most basic functions.

Comments or Questions on this episode? Join the conversation at the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

Engage with Stefan on the Twitter thought control machine.

Scott has jumped on the Gettr bandwagon and is also on DeSo and Instagram. He rants and raves on his blog, Strength and Reason.

We're also on Odysee. Rumble is coming as soon as Scott gets off his butt and uploads the podcasts.

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

Podcast theme music by Transistor.fm. Learn how to start a podcast here.

For example, if you drink too much whiskey, you'll get drunk. And if you get drunk, you'll have a hangover.

Whiskey —> Drunk —> Hangover

A crucial factor in the rampant sense of entitlement in the U.S. is the refusal to recognize the simple cause and effect of our choices.

When we make a decision, there are consequences that we must accept. But we're increasingly ignoring the connection between what we do and the outcome, so we're not being accountable for the situations we create.

When we're blind to how our actions contribute to the position in which we find ourselves, we're apt to look to others to fix our problems. Whether it's our parents or the government, we're quick to blame any convenient third-party then demand someone bail us out.

But when we take a moment to think about how our choices move the world's gears, we're more likely to understand how the world works. And we're better positioned to fix the problems we created with high character and integrity instead of whining like a petulant child.

For an example, check out my latest blog post at Strength and Reason: Idiocracy and Cause and Effect.

Myron Weber joined us (his 3rd visit) to answer the question “Is Democracy the Opiate of the Masses?”, exploring the notion that the United States is becoming less constitutional, less federal, and less republican (form of government, not party). A must listen for anyone wondering why America is in a constant state of dysfunctional political discourse.

On episode 49, Ben Moore shares the three rocks for leading a healthy life and discusses how anyone - even the slovenliest of the slobs - can start improving their life with better sleep, nutrition and exercise.

Too early to start thinking about 2022 resolutions? We think not.

Think Clearer | Definitions

Try something.

Find a quiet spot and say the word "definition" aloud.

It sounds stuffy, right?

Like the humor deprived librarian ordering you to lower your whispers to imperceptible levels to avoid offending the only other person in the building.

Yuck.

Full-time writers, college professors, and arrogant English majors embrace stuffy language.

The rest of us seek words that thrill, inspire, provoke, and generally engage us. Words that excite our hearts and minds.

That leaves little room for stuffy words like "Definition". And that's a problem. Of all the stuffy words, Definition is perhaps the most useful. Definitions save us time and emotional energy by centering discussions on common understanding - rather than misguided barbs and irrational quips.

Let's explore an example.

On Is Democracy the Opiate of the Masses?, Myron Weber described a model for our government that sought to definitively respond to the comment "We aren't a democracy, we are a republic."

Myron's model (start the podcast at 5:41 to hear his description) defined four elements of our government.

- The Constitution

- Federalism

- Republicanism

- Democracy

Defining the elements created a clear understanding of their functions and how each related to each other. Importantly, Myron’s definitions got to the heart of meaning for the words - not a strict definition from an authority but rather a highly useful description of what each word meant.

Without the meaning, Scott and I may have been lost, incapable of engaging in Myron's ideas.

Contrast Myron's approach with a recent conversation on the same topic on Twitter, a a platform that provides endless examples of how NOT to discuss a topic.

It started with a comment about Democracy from a member of the NAACP, followed by a comment from an MSNBC commentator about the failure of Democracy in the United States.

The comments came to my attention when an account I follow for expert insight on logistics, @man_integrated, responded about the distinction between "republic and democracy."

This exchange continued with a follower adding thoughts - but no definitions -to the thread.

The conversation ended with a definitive reference to the U.S. Government website.

Smack Down!!!

No definitions were defined. At least, not in a manner that generated agreement between participants.

And without definitions, a model for understanding the interrelated elements - as well as the possible critique that started the discussion (questioning the two senators per state rule) - wasn’t explored.

Instead, we witness a verbal volleyball match with each side lobbying their "definitive point" to the other - waiting for submission or another pass over the net.

The next time someone responds with "Actually...." pause for a moment and ask - have we defined our terms?

Save yourself the frustration of playing a verbal sport with no end. Even if it feels stuffy.

How to NOT Argue This Holiday Season

The holidays remind us that there is never a better time to learn the art of deep conversations without the necessary arguments.

Learn the process, in the time it takes to drink a hot coco, here.

In today's episode, fitness coach Ben Moore joins Stefan and me. We had a fantastic conversation about sleep, nutrition, and exercise. These "3 Rocks," as Ben calls them, form the foundation of an optimal life.  

Ben is articulate and possesses knowledge well beyond his age. You'll enjoy this conversation as much as Stefan and I.   

As always, we want to build a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.   

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there. 

About Ben 

1. Instagram 

2. Twitter 

3. The Level Up Library 

Resources 

1. American Medical Association language guide says drop terms like “morbid obesity,” “alcoholic,” and “fairness” 

2. American Medical Association Cancels ‘Morbid Obesity,’ ‘Inmates,’ ‘Homeless’ 

3. How to Write Creative Fiction: Umberto Eco’s Four Rules 

4. Hormesis (Getting Stronger) 

5. Hormesis (Science Direct) 

6. Why We Sleep: Unlocking the Power of Sleep and Dreams , by Matthew Walker 

7. The Joe Rogan Experience, ##1109 – Matthew Walker 

8. A New Integrative Model of the Self 

9. How To Stop Buying Shit Food 

10. Mentally Unscripted Ep27 - Joey Psypreneur Interview 

Mental Models 

1. Inertia 

2. Short-term vs. Long-term focus 

3. 1 step back for 2 steps forward 

4. Pivot 

5. Meaningful discomfort/hormesis 

6. Tradeoffs  

7. Knowledge --> Practice positive feedback loop 

8. Routine & Structure 

9. Entropy 

Top Takeaways 

1. The goal to improve your life is to make a lasting change. 

2. When you do something for a long time, it becomes part of your identity. It takes overcoming your ego to gain the self-awareness to know when you must change. Starting over with something new requires the willingness to take a step back. We can’t let inertia carry us forward to an unfulfilled life. 

3. A lack of reflection leads people to repeat the same mistakes. 

4. We should prioritize health and fitness at all ages, not only when we’re older.  

5. People need adversity to grow and become stronger. We’re too focused on making people comfortable when we should be focused on overcoming “negative energy.” 

6. Health is simple but not easy. Gaining the needed knowledge is easy but having the required discipline to put that knowledge into practice is a challenge for most people.  

7. Getting adequate sleep is an easy way to improve your performance. 

8. Sleep, nutrition, and exercise are the 3 big rocks that make up the foundation for our health. There aren’t any shortcuts on these. 

9. Your mental diet is as important as your physical diet. 

Engage with Scott and Stefan on the Twitter thought control machine and the Mentally Unscripted Substack. 

We're also on Odysee. 

Follow Scott at Strength and Reason and on DESO. 

Here’s how to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting. 

It's easier than you think. 

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game. 

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.  

Cheers! 

Podcast theme music by Transistor.fm. Learn how to start a podcast here. 

In our last episode, we explore why Italians never finish construction on their homes, the rise of the Open / Closed political paradigm, and the real cost of standing up to your tribe.

Tune in here.

Think Clearer | Newspaper Amnesia

Last week's post on "Transitory Inflation" got me thinking… what role do mental biases play in sustaining a false narrative, such as transitory inflation?

By my estimation, a lot. And faithfully trusting inaccurate news sources is the starting point.

Picture this:

After waking up on a gorgeous Saturday morning, you brew a pot of jet-black coffee and begin scrolling through the latest headlines from your trusted source, the Washington Post.

One headline, Fatal Bridge Collapse is Coming to An American City Near You, grabs your attention.

After all, you're a civil engineer with 15 years of experience, currently overseeing the yearlong construction of three bridges. You know the top 10 reasons any bridge in America will collapse (and how to prevent it).

One more sip of coffee and you are speedreading through the article, parsing one bad take after another, and thinking...

• The failure conditions cited as "chief concerns" only apply to a few bridges in a few cities.

• The odds of these failures occurring are substantially smaller (rare vs. imminent) than what is reported.

• The article doesn't cite maintenance work. performed by companies like yours, which is mandatory, ongoing, and remediates most of the problems.

You mentally mutter "Did the writer even interview a project manager?!!!"

Just as your brain begins to work on THE definitive treatise on modern bridge construction that YOU WILL DEFINITELY send to the WAPO editor, a different headline catches your eye, Cryptocurrencies to Be The Greatest Cause of Greenhouse Gasses by 2025.

!Poof! the treatise is forgotten.

Your attention darts towards the new topic, while your ego whispers, "You were right! Bitcoin is going to ruin our finances and burn down every last tree in the rainforest! I must know the truth."

In seconds, the inaccurate reporting of one subject is replaced by the illusion of pristine accuracy on a topic you know next to nothing about.

You're suffering from Gell-Mann Amnesia.

False Narratives seek and thrive in Gell-Mann Amnesia.

Readers get hooked on a news feed, recognize and instantly forget inconsistencies / inaccuracies, and assume the "source" must be accurate on topics they know little about. Here, False Narratives can hide behind people’s ignorance and desire to feel right, rather than be accurate.

There is a Simple Cure

Most forms of Amnesia require (...years of...) treatment from a qualified medical doctor. Fortunately, a healthy dose of skepticism and a few truth-seeking questions cure Gell-Mann Amnesia in seconds.

Here are four questions to ask of ANY article from ANY source.

1. Is this fact, opinion, or both?

2. What questions weren't asked/answered but should have been?

3. How might the conclusions change if the author’s understanding of the first principles isn't accurate?

4. What is the steelman argument for the opposite conclusions?

You don’t have to stop reading your favorite news source to drop the illusion that the authors get things wrong time to time (or most of the time).

Just ask better questions.

Stefan

How to NOT Argue This Holiday Season

The holidays remind us that there is never a better time to learn the art of deep conversations without the necessary arguments.

Learn the process, in the time it takes to drink a hot coco, here.

We had a great discussion that will give you a lot to think about regarding democracy and the direction in which the U.S. is heading.  

As always, we want to build a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.  

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there. 

About Myron 

Myron Weber leads the Northwood Advisors team to design and deliver high ROI solutions to business needs: 

• Solving complex business data problems in operations, sales, and marketing. 

• BI and Data Warehouse design and development. 

• Building custom applications to fill gaps not covered by enterprise systems. 

 Connect with Myron on LinkedIn or learn more at www.NorthwoodAdvisors.com 

You can also listen to Myron on Mental Supermodels. He and his co-host, Jeremy, explore the theory and practice, the art and science of mental modeling for problem-solving and decision making in business and life. 

You can listen to Mental Supermodels on all major podcast platforms. 

Resources 

1. Winston Churchill preposition quote (as Myron mentioned, this quote is disputed but it’s still good) 

2. What Does ‘Constitutional Interpretation’ Mean, Anyway?, by Scott Grayson 

3. Popular Sovereignty, Judicial Supremacy, and the American Revolution: Why the Judiciary Cannot be the Final Arbiter of Constitutions, by William J. Watkins, Jr. 

4. The Myth of the Rule of Law, by John Hasnas 

5. Aristotle’s Philosophy of Government 

1. Aristotle: Politics 

2. Aristotle’s Idea of A Good State 

3. Aristotle on Democracy and Government 

4. Classification of Government According to Aristotle 

6. The Brion McClanahan Show 

7. Democracy, the God that Failed, by Hans-Hermann Hoppe 

8. FACT: Big Media and Big Tech Stole the 2020 Election 

9. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, by Yuval Noah Harari 

10. Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV) 

11. A Beginner's Guide to Decentralized Autonomous Organizations 

Mental Models 

1. Making distinctions 

2. False dichotomy 

3. Inherent flaws/Fatal flaw 

4. Economic Calculation Problem 

5. Structural thinking 

6. Analogical thinking 

7. High stakes & reversibility 

8. Root cause analysis 

9. Incentives matter 

Top Takeaways 

1. The distinction between whether the U.S. is a republic or a democracy is a false dichotomy. Democracy describes the nature of voting, while republic refers to the extent to which public policy reflects the will of the voters.  

2. The built-in mechanisms for government in the U.S. are the Constitution, federalism, republicanism, and democracy. Over time, the bureaucratic and intelligence state became another mechanism for the government that wasn't intended by the founders. Democracy is the opiate of the masses that hides the diminishing role the Constitution, federalism, and republicanism play in our current system of government.  

3. There is a large group of unelected bureaucrats that exert a lot of control over the day-to-day life of the citizenry. 

4. The power and money involved in government distort democracy by turning elections into high-stakes contests that incentivize power-hungry people to do anything necessary to win office. 

Engage with Scott and Stefan on the Twitter thought control machine and the Mentally Unscripted Substack. 

We're also on Odysee. 

Follow Scott at Strength and Reason and on DESO. 

Here’s How to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting. 

It's easier than you think. 

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game. 

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.  

Cheers! 

Podcast theme music by Transistor.fm. Learn how to start a podcast here. 

Don’t forget to sign up for our email list and get How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret “Go Meta” approach that makes any topic fair game.

It’s FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Thanks, Scott

Do you have a friend who accuses you of being okay with school shootings because you support gun rights? Or that you’re racist because you support immigration control.

Don’t you want to dump a beer over that guy’s head? Don’t. Instead, shut him up by pointing out his logic errors. Then, leave him speechless with your own, well-reasoned argument.

So, let’s get rolling. In this article, I will introduce logical fallacies and provide some examples. Then, I’ll give you some tips on avoiding errors in your reasoning.

What Is A Logical Fallacy?

When we live a life based on reason, we need to identify and avoid logical fallacies. But what is a logical fallacy?

A logical fallacy is an error in reason that often leads to a weak or invalid conclusion.

Remember, when an argument is fallacious, it doesn’t mean that the conclusion is incorrect. It only means that the conclusion doesn’t flow from the premises.

If we aren’t careful, that logic error, intentional or not, can lead us astray.

So, when you encounter a logical fallacy, don’t assume that the conclusion is incorrect. Instead, put more thought into the argument and do more research if necessary. In the end, you need to determine the conclusion’s strength or validity for yourself.

Why Is It Important to Spot a Logical Fallacy?

We must consider all the available information when evaluating an argument. When we don’t, we open the door to logical fallacies.

A logical fallacy is often a mistake resulting from a quick or emotional decision. But, on occasion, people such as politicians and the media use logical fallacies to blur facts. They then use these blurred facts to create hatred and win votes or sell advertising.

Your ability to spot a logical fallacy is a valuable skill to keep you grounded as close as possible to the truth. It’s a tool that rewards you with independent, sound, and rational judgments.

Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments

Before we continue, let’s take a step back to understand the two types of arguments. They are deductive and inductive arguments.

Deductive

A deductive argument is one in which it’s impossible to have true premises and a false conclusion. Take the following case:

(1) All men are mortal (true)

(2) Socrates is a man (true)

(3) So, Socrates is mortal (true)

Since the premises (lines 1 & 2) are true, the conclusion (line 3) must be true. An argument that violates this standard commits a logical error. We describe deductive arguments as either “valid” or “invalid.”

Inductive

An inductive argument is one with true premises but an uncertain conclusion. An inductive argument lacks the rigor of the deductive argument. So, the conclusion is on a sliding scale between valid and invalid. We use the terms “strong” and “weak” to describe good and bad inductive arguments.

The following inductive argument is an example of a strong argument:

(1) Every day to date, the law of gravity has held

(2) So, the law of gravity will hold tomorrow.

Gravity has never failed. So, it’s probable that when you jump out of bed tomorrow morning, you’ll land on the floor. Same as every other morning. But we can’t say that for sure.

Overnight some alien could come to Earth and use an unknown weapon to cancel Earth’s gravity. If that happens, you’ll instead wake up in the morning floating above your bed.

Formal vs. Informal Fallacies

Fallacies break down into two broad categories: formal and informal.

Formal

A formal fallacy, also known as a non-sequitur, is an error in a deductive argument’s form. It is an error where an argument’s conclusion does not follow from its premises. For example:

(1) All sharks are fish

(2) All salmon are fish

(3) So, all salmon are sharks.

Because both sharks and salmon are fish doesn’t mean that salmon and sharks are the same things.

Informal

An informal fallacy is an inductive argument where the conclusion doesn’t follow the premises. We refer to informal fallacies when we say an argument is a logical fallacy. I’ll go over some examples in the next section.

Logical Fallacy Examples

I will start a series of blog posts discussing common logical fallacies. But, to give you an idea of a logical fallacy, here are a few examples.

Ad Hominem (Personal Attack)

Ad hominem is an attack that shifts focus from the argument to the opponent’s character. And the opponent’s character is not at issue.

The attacker doesn’t have a counter-argument. So, the attacker resorts to attacking the opponent instead of the opponent’s argument.

Example:

Jack says that we need Medicare for All. Everyone knows that Jack is lazy and doesn’t want to work hard for anything, so Medicare for All is a bad idea.

Jack may be a lazy clod who only wants a benefit he didn’t earn. But that is irrelevant to whether Medicare for All is a good idea.

Note that even though this argument is a logical fallacy, it doesn’t mean that the conclusion is wrong. It only means that the premises do not support the conclusion. Medicare for All may be a terrible idea, but Jack’s laziness has no bearing on that conclusion.

Strawman

Strawmanning is misrepresenting an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack.

Think of the 3 Little Pigs. The Big Bad Wolf made short work of the straw house but couldn’t blow down the brick house. Imagine that the Big Bad Wolf had a magic wand that could turn the brick house into straw. Mr. Big Bad Wolf could now blow the house down.

Now, imagine the magic wand worked on an argument. With one wave of the wand, a person could turn a strong argument into a weak one.

Example:

Jane: I’m against gun control legislation.

Christine: So, you support people shooting up kindergarten classrooms.

In this example, Jane never said she supported gun violence in classrooms. She only said that she didn’t support gun control legislation. It could be that Jane thinks non-legislative solutions are better to keep guns out of schools.

Strawmanning is a tactic to avoid debating the opponent’s actual argument. An attacker can also use it to make the opponent’s argument appear ridiculous.

Appeal to Authority

How many times have you seen an argument something like this: “Person X said Y, so Y must be true?” We see it in the following examples:

1) celebrities selling goods and services,

2) cable news pundits ranting about social issues, or

3) former government officials criticizing political policy.

Person X may or may not be an authority on the topic, but it doesn’t matter. Because someone is an authority doesn’t mean he’s correct or unbiased.

Example:

Ben is a scientist, and he says global warming is real. So, global warming is real.

In this example, we don’t know Ben’s field of expertise. He could be a biologist who has never studied the environment. Or, the company funding his research may stand to profit from renewable energy.

These are only a few common logical fallacies. There are many more. Check out Logically Fallacious[affiliate] (website) for more examples.

How to Avoid Logical Fallacies

I haven’t run across a secret formula for avoiding logical fallacies. Like I mentioned in my post on reason, your mind is your best tool to avoid getting misled.

So, what can you do? Start by learning the structure of a persuasive argument. Next, understand the ways an argument may fall apart. Finally, learn the most common logical fallacies.

Remember, the issues we deal with in real life are often complex and multi-faceted. So, don’t be hasty and avoid global conclusions. Another good tactic is to eschew either-or arguments since life is not a binary, black-or-white proposition.

When you read or listen to commentary, study the arguments to identify logical errors. Try to determine if the errors are intentional or if the fallacy is a mistake in reasoning.

Pay special attention to political speech. Politicians are good at misleading voters with logical fallacies.

Pay attention to how logical fallacies creep into your arguments. Then, see if you can rework your case to correct the error.

Understanding Logical Fallacies is Important

Understanding logical fallacies help us recognize when people try to mislead us.

Logical fallacies may be intentional or unintentional. Either way, such errors hurt the arguer’s credibility. When used to mislead, such as in a political speech, logical fallacies are even more egregious.

If you don’t know how to spot them, they’ll lure you into an incorrect line of thinking. Worse, if you’re the one making the argument, your credibility gets hurt.

Strength and Reason is about building a life of freedom and independence. Spotting logical fallacies is your best tool to remain an independent thinker. It keeps you from getting swayed by emotional, flawed arguments.

We also explore our shifting paradigms. It's no longer left vs. right or communist vs. capitalist. Instead, the events surrounding COVID-19 are waking people up to a new way of looking at the world, and those entrenched in positions of power and influence want to prevent us from changing our perspective.

Finally, we have an exciting discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of Bitcoin maximalism in terms of generalization versus specialization.

This episode was an exciting ride where we started with a topic and saw where it takes us. So, please sit back and enjoy it.

As always, we want to build a community around Mentally Unscripted. So, share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.

And remember, the conclusion you reach is less important than the process you follow to get there.

Resources

1. Mental Update #1, the Mentally Unscripted Newsletter.

2. Liberty Uninterrupted Ep 064 – Rebuking the State ft. Scott Grayson of Mentally Unscripted

3. In our Thinking Outside the Box news:

   1. Man in Italy uses fake silicone arm to try to get vaccine certificate

   2. Man uses fake arm to get vaccine certificate in Italy Jami Ganz - Saturday

4. Matt Taibi on Joe Rogan

5. Where Good Ideas Come from: The Natural History of Innovation, Stephen Johnson

6. Qiao Wang is hiring tweet

7. Elon Musk 66 years from first controlled, powered flight to landing on the moon tweet

8. A Beginner's Guide to Decentralized Autonomous Organizations

9. Muneeb.btc tweet

10. Mentally Unscripted Ep30 - Brandon Wark of Free State Colorado - Why the Future Belongs to Those Who Participate

Mental Models

1. Begin with the end in mind

2. Garbage in, garbage out

3. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail

4. Immediate results vs remote results

5. Transparency vs. black box

6. Recency bias

7. Opportunity costs/tradeoffs

8. State of denial

9. The best way to combat a bad idea is with a good idea

10. Capture

    1. Audience

    2. Regulatory

11. Unintended consequences

12. Second-level thinking

13. Open systems vs. Closed systems

14. Specialization vs. Generalization

15. High stakes decisions

16. Open-Mindedness / Lattice Work of Mental Models lead to Innovation

17. Tribalism - Costs of going against your tribe

18. Fragility

19. Marginal utility

20. Complexity invites regulatory capture

21. Tradeoffs

22. Sunk Costs

23. Skin in the game

24. Simplify complex ideas

25. Feynman Learning Technique

Top Takeaways

1. Recency bias and propaganda make us believe the government can solve everything, but we must accept that it can't. We must learn to live with some things. It's not clear that our leaders have a clear end goal in mind regarding our COVID-19 response.

2. Traditional media outlets are closed systems that only offer a narrow range of disagreement. They're seeing a danger from decentralized media and open-system media.

3. The way governments, businesses, and individuals react to situations is changing. We're moving away from traditional left/right, capitalism/communism dichotomies to centralized/decentralized or open systems/closed systems.

4. Generalists have more resilience than specialists. In the case of crypto, generalization is superior to specialization (maximalization) in the current world environment.

Engage with Scott and Stefan on the Twitter thought control machine and the Mentally Unscripted Substack.

We're also on Odysee.

Follow Scott at Strength and Reason and on DESO.

Here’s How to have stimulating conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting.

It's easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret "Go Meta" approach that makes any topic fair game.

It's FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

Podcast theme music by Transistor.fm. Learn how to start a podcast here.

In our latest episode, we discuss the muddied world of tribal thinking, the rise of financial zombies, meritocratic privilege, and how Da-Vinci predicted the value of NFT’s.

Sit back and enjoy it here.

Think Clearer | Transitory Inflation

On November 11, Jerome Powell, the current head of the Federal Reserve Banking testified that ''it was time to retire the term transitory when describing inflation."

Color the average American shocked.

While anyone shopping for groceries, buying Christmas presents, or filling up their gas tank knew this to be true, our economic czars needed time and data to be sure.

Apparently, 7 months of inflation running at 2x to 3x the target was enough to change their minds.

If price increases aren’t transitory, does that make them permanent? Was there ever an alternative scenario?

Yes, and probably not.

Let’s start by defining inflation.

As we discussed in our inflation deep dive, inflation commonly refers to a measure of price changes for a basket of goods. (fun fact- inflation used to refer to the expansion of the money supply, not prices. How times change...)

The Consumer Price Index (CPI) includes groceries, housing, clothing, transportation, and 4 other categories intended to capture the bulk of an average American’s expenditure.

The CPI has been used for decades to monitor inflation rates and is used by government agencies, such as Social Security, to benchmark payments (i.e. COLA adjustments).

Despite its institutional appeal, the basket remains a point of contention for those who believe it underestimates the real rate of inflation.

There are many people who believe that CPI, especially due to changes in that calculation over the past few decades, understates the true inflation rate in the United States. House prices, food prices, healthcare prices, and tuition prices are all rising faster than CPI, and they represent the bulk of middle-class household expenditure. Sometimes proponents of this idea are dismissed as “inflation truthers”, since they push back on expert numbers and assert that CPI is manipulated in favor of a narrative.

Lyn Alden, The Ultimate Guide to Inflation

Rarely do we see periods of a decline in inflation for the basket of goods.

Inflation rates - based on the objective of the central bank - tend to go up and stay up (they maintain a single-digit inflation target (~2%) even though it’s unclear they have the power to hit it).

Only in periods of severe economic contraction do the rates drop (after world wars, the great depression, the great recession, etc.). And these don’t reverse the decades-long trend prior to the drop.

It's mostly up only.

Does everything go up only?

No.

Commodities, such as oil, can experience extreme fluctuations in price stability over time based on global supply and demand dynamics.

And technology innovation and productivity tend to decrease the cost of products in industries allowed to experiment (limited regulation, price flexibility, an incentive to innovate, etc.).

Unfortunately, there are few indications that carbon energy prices will decline as first-world governments focus on decarbonizing their economies (not to mention supply chain shocks).

And innovation takes times to mature.

All this leaves one wondering why Powell introduced transitory to just to retire it a short time later…

Our Guide to Never Argue Again

The holidays remind us that there is never a better time to learn the art of deep conversations without the necessary arguments.

Download your free guide to How to Never Argue Again (Unless You Want To) here.

That line of thought then carries us into the concept of financialization. Here we ask how a focus on stock price maximization has turned many American companies from global innovators into financial zombies. Then we revisit the idea of meritocracy and explore a new way of thinking about the concept of privilege. We close the episode with more talk about value and the NFT space.

This episode is an exciting ride where we started with a topic and saw where it takes us. Sit back and enjoy it.

As always, we want to build a community around Mentally Unscripted. So share this episode with your friends and interact with us at MentallyUnscripted.com.

And remember, the process you follow to reach a conclusion is more important than the conclusion itself.

Resources

1. The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York

2. Elizabeth Warren Oil Company Tweet

3. Modern Monetary Theory

   1. Here’s What You Need to Know About The Deficit Myth

   2. MMT #2 - Has MMT Won the Fiscal Policy Debate?

4. Economics in One Lesson, by Henry Hazlitt

5. Basic Economics: ACitizen'ss Guide to the Economy, by Thomas Sowell

6. Joe Biden accused of falling asleep during Cop26 climate summit speeches

7. Purple Cow: Transform Your Business by Being Remarkable, by Seth Godin

8. Vampires at the Gate?

9. No, We Shouldn't Bail Out Boeing

10. Inside the $2.5 Trillion Debt Binge That Has Taken S&P Titans Including Boeing and AT&T from Blue Chips to Near Junk

11. The 2021 Forbes 400 List Of Richest Americans: Facts And Figures

Mental Models

1. Second-Order Consequences

2. Appeal to authority

3. Authority & Credibility

4. The concept of two realities

5. First, do no harm

6. Incentives matter

Top Takeaways

1. Tribalism has led us to judge credibility based on who the person is and what team they’re on. This leads to appeals to authority and forgetting to ask the critical question of how much credibility the authority has. Does each tribe live in its own reality and have those realities reach a point where they can’t mix? And do we give authorities a pass when they’re members of our tribe?

2. It’s a fallacy to think that the policies of the U.S. Government, the most significant, most powerful government in history, don’t impact our economy.

3. We’ve become more focused on financial incentives rather than creating value to improve the world.

4. We think about success in terms of a single generation, and doing so raises many questions about privilege. But what is privilege exactly, and how much do we need to think about. And does our view of privilege change if we look at success as a slow and steady multi-generational process rather than a meteoric, single-generation rise from rags to riches?

5. NFTs are a new product many in the crypto world think is the next big thing. But is there any value in NFTs, and from where does the value come?

Engage with Scott and Paul on the Twitter thought control machine.

We’re also on Odysee (full episodes and clips).

Follow Scott at Strength and Reason and on DESO.

How to have thrilling conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting…

It’s easier than you think.

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret “Go Meta” approach that makes any topic fair game.

It’s totally FREE (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.

Cheers!

Sara has excellent insights into our changing attitude towards work, from our desire to escape cubicle zombie nation to organizational insecurities that lead to micromanaging employees. Her advice will help you shape a career that will take you to the upper levels of your field with confidence, integrity, and nobility.  

If 2020 and 2021 have you questioning the nature of how you earn a living, this is a must-listen episode.  

Sara is friendly, engaging, and blunt, so we had an excellent time talking to her. 

Resources 

1. Causey Consulting 

2. Causey Consulting Blog and Podcast 

3. Toxic Positivity 

4. Toxic Positivity, Part 2 

5. Breaking Toxic Patterns 

6. “I Just Couldn’t Get Over It…” (Sara discussed toxic positivity a bit more in this episode) 

7. Toxic Optimism & #Blessed 

8. The Myth of Sisyphus, by Albert Camus 

Mental Models 

1. The Observer Effect 

2. Results oriented vs process oriented 

3. Toxic positivity & toxic optimism 

4. Probabilistic thinking  

Top Takeaways 

1. The workforce today is more empowered than it has been in years. Our response to COVID-19 has made employers and employees realize that everyone doesn’t need to be packed into an office to work effectively. One of the downsides for the employer, and arguably an advantage for the employee, is the employer has to learn to trust its employees. 

2. Some employers don’t want to give up micromanaging their employees. As a result, they try to construct a digital panopticon to control their employees no matter where they are working. But good employees are savvy and won’t tolerate such monitoring. 

3. The observer effect can cause employees to underperform because of the anxiety of thinking their being watched. 

4. Freelancing websites can offer benefits for people who are just getting started in a freelancing career, but they lose their advantages as people gain experience. 

5. Don’t be afraid to fire a bad client. Establish the rules of engagement upfront, and don’t be scared to cut ties with any client who doesn’t respect them. 

6. We must accept that life won’t turn out the way we want. Toxic positivity and toxic optimism can prevent us from preparing for the inevitable bad day. We can’t “cheat the system.” 

Engage with Scott and Paul on the Twitter thought control machine. 

We’re also on Odysee (full episodes and clips). 

Follow Scott at Strength and Reason and on DESO. 

How to have thrilling conversations on blistering hot topics without fighting… 

It’s easier than you think. 

Download How to Never Argue Again (Unless you Want To) at Mentally Unscripted and discover the secret “Go Meta” approach that makes any topic fair game. 

It’s totally free (for now) and worth hundreds in therapy.  

Cheers!