Read the two following list of words that describe two different people. One is Bad and one is Good. Which is which?
- EVIL, HATE, ANGER, JOY, CARE, LOVE
- LOVE, CARE, JOY, ANGER, HATE, EVIL
If you said #1 is Bad and #2 is Good, then congratulations you are like 99% of people who look at these lists. But you are also a victim of the priming effect. Priming is when the brain subconsciously draws a conclusion based on the first thing it sees, or upon an existing state. Since the first list of words begins with “Evil, Hate” the brain wants to make that list “Bad”. The second list begins with “Love and Care” so the brain wants to make that list “Good”. But in fact both lists are the same, just in reverse order. So both people are described with exactly the same descriptors, just in a different order. Both are equal, but the brain wants to choose and put into buckets based on first words. Beware of Priming Effect in your own decisions.
Thanks, Tony Wrighton for spending time geeking out about biohacking during my last trip to London. Our conversation is now a podcast!
Here are Tony’s show notes:
Martin is CEO of Upgrade Labs, the world’s first dedicated biohacking facility.
I’ve been there in LA and it is fantastic. A playground for health, wellness and you get a damn good workout in the process.
Their data-driven technology uses measurable and trackable results that can help optimize one’s overall health by lowering levels of inflammation, improving cognitive function, quickening muscle growth, and optimizing hormone levels.
He was in London and so we caught up and recorded a podcast.
After this I”m pretty sure you might want to try;
- The Cheat Machine
- Red light therapy
- Virtual Float Tank
- Cold Hiit
- and much more.
Last week I sat down with my friend Michelle Soro and yacked about biohacking.
some details of the podcast:
Listen in below and definitely check out the Upgrade Labs 6th Annual Biohacking Conference! Let’s get upgraded! 🥳
Let’s get upgraded!
Some Questions I Ask:
- What are the most effective biohacks for you? (10:08)
- Why did you join Upgrade Labs? (26:15)
- Will those who attend the conference able to implement what they learned back at home? (33:38)
- Who is the Biohacking Upgrade Labs Conference for? (38:35)
- What is your philosophy on people who make decisions? (40:25)
- How did you meet Dave Asprey? (45:11)
- What rituals and routines help you get stuff done? (49:43)
- How do you define fulfillment? (51:52)
In This Episode, You Will Learn:
- How Martin changed his vitality in life for the better. (7:48)
- How Martin upgraded his physicality to improve his cognitive functions and biologically become 20 years younger. (10:13)
- About various parts of the cell that determine your overall health functionality. (17:14)
- About Martin’s experience with cryotherapy and how it benefited him. (21:42)
- About Michelle’s instantaneous healing experience with Upgrade Labs. (31:27)
- Why Martin is working to figure out how to make Upgrade Labs accessible to everyone. (36:17)
- How Upgrade Labs hacks meditation with technology. (48:08)
Wendy Suzuki is a wicked smart person. I love to exercise. I know exercise is good for me, especially my energy levels and how I look in the mirror. But how about how my brain shows up for everyone else? And in life generally? Turns out exercise has many cognitive, emotional and mental benefits. And there is data.
“There is no “Truth”. Only Stories”
Yea I said that. It is a summary of lots that I have learned over the years. What do I mean? When I was younger I was often searching for the “Truth” with a capital “T”. The ANSWER. What I have found over time is that more and more things that I thought were “Truth” turned out to be stories that I was told, or that I believed. And that turns out to be the case for many “scientific facts.” For example, is the theory of Evolution a “Truth” or a story which matches our current data? It is a story. There are facts in there sure, but our current understanding is just a summary of what we know now. The details of that story are different today than they were 100 years ago. All scientific “Truths” are in fact our best guess about the Truth based on the data we now know. So basically the story we explain this complicated thing to ourselves to us today. 100 years from now the story is likely to have evolved. Hopefully more precise. I am especially suspicious of “Truths” that are judgments. For example “Global warming is bad”. That may be so, and that is a judgment. “Climate change is happening” is much more precise and free of judgment.
So now when I hear a “Truth”, I ask myself a couple of questions:
- What is the story that this person is telling me?
- What is the data and assumptions behind that story?
- How much of the story is emotion versus data?
- Do I choose to believe the story? (knowing I am unlikely to ever have all the data)
I overheard a conversation about New Years resolutions last week. In it the guys were talking about long lists of New Years resolutions. And I of course was thinking about my own. But then for some reason a snippet from Milan Kundera quote popped into my head “there are only two ways to define the self: addition and subtraction.” That has always rung true to me. I switch between addition and subtraction. When the to do lists get too long often I will simplify it to just one of each. Out of all the possible things I could do (addition) and not do (subtraction), what is the most impactful one of each I tan think of for this project? For 2019 mine are
Add: more personal time with my employees at upgrade labs
One of my favorite tools of self analysis is the via character strength profile . I hear a lot of advice (which i agree with) that people should play to their strengths and not avoid their fears. But what are my strengths ? Character strengths? This tool tells you. My top six are Creativity, love of learning, perspective, honesty, perseverance (resilience), and judgement. Pretty much straight up ceo stuff. That makes sense.
The more I read the Stoics, the more I agree with the general approach to life. I am also fascinated that, without the aide of much science, they got so many things right. We now know through Quantum Physics that everything is some form of energy wave. We are all made of the same stuff, just vibrating at different frequencies so some appear solid, some fluid, some alive, some dead, etc. Modern quantified spirituality guys like Dr. Joe Dispenza call it the “Universal Field”. I have no idea what it is, but the Stoics, and Marcus, in particular, nailed it. Basically, we are all connected, made of the same stuff. So remember that when you get tilted by someone. A part of them is you and vice versa. Would you be so tilted at yourself?
I just answered the Moral Machine self driving car scenarios and i did it honestly unlike it seems most respondents. This is one of the artifacts of surveys like this. The issue comes down to what reference point are you applying to your answer? When asked “moral dilemmas” most people try to answer what they think others want to hear, they take the “what if my answer were published in the New York Times?” Approach, typically choosing whatever is politically popular today. That is why in this survey the average respondent to the “protect passengers” questions are exactly in the middle. Indifferent. Yet is everyone really indifferent?
To combat this bias I took the purposeful approach of answering the question not as if were some theoretical car with theoretical people. I decided to answer as if it were my car with my family in it and I didn’t know the animals or pedestrians. That is the 99.9% real life scenario. When I buy a self driving car I want it to have variables that I can configure on these kinds of things. And I for one will set it to always protect me and my family. When researchers ask the question this way (your family in the car) they in fact find that there is a significant preference to protect the passengers.
When reading these kinds of survey results. Always ask yourself it the designers considered the frame of reference correctly and if you were in the car with your children would you answer differently