I was chatting with a friend on the phone yesterday and this statement just fell out of my mouth: “If I can’t prove it, I don’t argue for it.”

This hasn’t always been the case. In the past, I would argue for positions I had opinions about but certainly didn’t have all the facts.

The problem, as I see it now, was asserting that what I was saying was “the truth.” If I had labeled it as just my point of view, I could have left the truth out of it and also the obstinance that’s displayed when you claim the truth is on your side.

Over the years, what I found is this: the arguments go nowhere. There’s just a back and forth of bashing each other with “the truth,” resulting in hard feelings after hard arguments which were soft on the facts.

Here’s one of the things I would argue about: Nature or Nurture.

Were people born that way or conditioned that way? This argument can apply to too many situations to mention. Suffice it to say, that no one to this day has all the facts line up on their side for either nature or nurture, yet they continue to argue. Not me.

There is “no win” involved for either side, just perpetual contention about opinions labeled as truth. It’s truly a waste of breath and time.

I will readily share my opinions on topics when asked, but I no longer argue for them. I may offer a rationale for having my opinion but I now know I can’t prove it and have stopped pretending that I can.

Here’s the closest I can come to the truth: You’ll be involved in fewer pointless arguments when you stop pretending that you can prove your opinion.

All the best,

John

There is a magic bean when it comes to evolving (changing). It’s called “Interruption.”

It works every time. The rub is this: You have to work at it.

There is no denying that we are patterned individuals. Our actions are dictated by our conditioned patterns of thinking and behavior.

When we want to change a pattern, we normally go about it by attacking it. If that strategy works, it’s short-term. Think of dieting to lose weight as one of these attacks.

The strategy for evolving that works is twofold:

1. Noticing

2. Interrupting

Noticing a pattern of thinking or behavior is the necessary first step in changing. “Yes, I do do that” has to enter our awareness. Not only is it necessary to notice, it’s most productive to notice when the pattern is happening. Notice the pattern while it’s going on. “OMG I’m yelling now because I’m frustrated” is an example of noticing in real time.

Suppose that’s something you want to change. You could practice not yelling over and over again in imagined, frustrating situations but when reality hits, you’ll go back to your default pattern unless you outgrow it. That’s what change is: outgrowing or updating a pattern.

Interruption is the magic bean to use once you notice patterns in real time. You can’t use this bean just once and expect results. You have to use the prescription over and over until you get results.

This is not an experimental theory I’m offering. It’s the proven way deliberate change happens.

When you notice that you are exhibiting a pattern you want to change, immediately interrupt it. If, as in the previous example, you notice you are yelling because you are frustrated, immediately interrupt the pattern and adjust your volume downward, in real time. Do that every time you notice you are running that pattern.

This is where the magic happens – in the space between stimulus and reaction.

Consistent application of this two step technique updates your old pattern over time and has you responding in more up-to-date ways to surrounding stimuli.

I liken the process to learning to “spit shine” shoes when I was in the U.S. Navy. The method seems like it’s never going to work, until it does. Here’s a description of the process I wrote about a few years ago:

In order for your porous, cheap leather boots to shine like a black mirror on the toe portion, you have to constantly apply polish and water and rub in a circle in the same spot to get the desired result. It doesn’t happen on the first application and is still absent after the 30th. The sense is it will never happen and giving up is not an option. Your drill instructors insist on your success and their tactics seem heavy-handed, until that little spot of reflection begins to show itself. Then success feeds on itself until you have a shining example of your work.

This method of change is available to all of us and the results are guaranteed if you guarantee to put in the work. This method doesn’t attack the problem; it interrupts it, and gets results that last for a lifetime.

Once you outgrow something, you’ll never go back. The only question you need to answer regarding changing is this: Am I willing to go to work on a way that works?

If your answer is “Yes,” you now have access to the magic bean.

All the best,

John

The Grasshopper delivered this nip of nectar early this morning: “You will experience emotional discomfort when your conscious and unconscious mind are at odds.”

First, let me apologize to my dearly departed hypnosis teacher Dr. Dave Dobson who would bristle at the use of the words “unconscious” or “subconscious” when it comes to describing that part of our mind. He would bellow and say, “That part of your mind is not unconscious; it’s other than conscious.” He explained that it was present and paying attention at all times and wasn’t “sub” or “unconscious” to anything.

Regardless of the nomenclature, the discomfort you feel is real when these two parts are not on the same page.

Let’s take the topic of forgiveness as an example. You may have been consciously magnamimous and told someone you have forgiven them for their transgression. But if you still experience emotional discomfort concerning their actions, your other than conscious has yet to catch up with your conscious declaration.

You may intellectually arrive at a new plateau about a certain topic but if you haven’t caught up subconsciously, you will be sent uncomfortable sensations.

Many “senior citizens” grew up in an era where interracial marriage was taboo and gay marriage was unheard of. They may have consciously evolved to the position that it’s perfectly acceptable for people to marry whomever they want, but if they encounter discomfort at the kissing ritual at the wedding ceremony, it’s a sure bet their subconscious isn’t yet up-to-date.

What to do?

Shine a light on your subconscious. Calling on the wisdom of famed Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, “Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.”

Begin to notice your discomfort. Not only that, take the time to feel it rather than what we normally do – dismiss it. Allowing yourself to fully feel the discomfort is a necessary step in updating what’s going on below decks.

Taking the time to feel rather than evaluate your feelings is a transformative step in bringing your conditioning in line with your conscious evolvement.

Rather than chase the feelings away only to come back another day, sit with them and let them have their say. That means to fully feel the discomfort in your body until it starts to fade away. My experience is you will have to do this exercise many more times than once, in order for what you feel to be in line with what you say.

The payoff for us is emotional comfort which, as the credit card commercial says, “is priceless.”

All the best,

John

“In the space between the positions is where you’ll find the solutions.” So said The Grasshopper yesterday afternoon.

Upon recording that thought onto my phone, I initially thought it was about compromising with another, but it’s much deeper.

Seems we all have positions on something and oftentimes they are just concrete assertions that leave little space for new information to occupy.

The new information just bounces off of us and isn’t considered when seeking a solution.

Having rigid positions, by definition, means less porosity for something new to get through.

There is space in even the most densely packed ideas. We just have to stop and take notice.

“Is there room for compromise?” is an often asked negotiating question. The space between the positions isn’t the space that’s between your proposal and my proposal that needs to be explored. It’s the space that’s inside each of our tightly packed positions that needs recognition.

It’s our internal space that we have control of, not the external space that exists between our divide with another.

The compromise isn’t with another; it’s with ourselves. We have to search for the space within us in order to be more open to finding a solution rather than what we normally do: defend a position.

It’s the space that’s contained in our tightly packed idea that needs to be explored. When you look through a magnifying glass at a picture in a newspaper, you begin to see that the seemingly solid picture is composed of many dots, all of which have spaces between them. The same is true of any assertion we make and/or defend.

Our compromise is with ourselves.

Find the spaces between your position first, and then you’ll be in a better position to find solutions with another.

All the best,

John

The art of leaving a voicemail message is on life support and on its way to an unnecessary death. It’s not too late to save the patient.

I can’t speak for you but my memory is not as good as it used to be and I only know about seven phone numbers by heart, including the one for Chinese take-out.

When someone leaves me a voice mail and rapidly speaks their number and only says it once, it makes me have to go back through the message several times and act as interpreter. Many people don’t get a call back because, frankly, I don’t want to work that hard. Some don’t even leave a call back number but expect a call back.

Unless you are one of the sainted seven, please don’t assume that anyone knows your number. Don’t make them go look it up. Put it right out there TWICE so they have easy access to it the first time. Additionally, speak the number as though you were giving nuclear launch codes to the Pentagon.

If it’s important to you to have the person call you back, make it as easy as possible for them to do so.

This message also applies to email and texts. I cannot begin to tell you the amount of emails I get that lack specificity on how they want me to respond. Here are real world examples: “Smoking is killing me.” “My doctor says I’m overweight.”

Of course I answer, “How can I help?” but the amount of assumption that people put in their communiqués is staggering. They must believe you can read minds as to what information they specifically want.

Reminds me of an old pseudo-radio commercial created to show the ineffectiveness of lack of specificity.

“It’s our amazing, annual sale and it’s only going on for a limited time. Act now to get the biggest savings ever. Hurry on down so you’re not left out of the biggest sales event of the century. No offer will be refused. Bad credit or no credit will not stop you from getting huge savings. It’s a once in a lifetime extravaganza that you can’t afford to miss. Drive, walk or run to our nearest location and take advantage of our doorbuster deals. Don’t be left behind because time is running out for you to save a bundle. So grab your coat, cash, credit cards or checkbook and head out to our incredible sale. But hurry, these deals won’t last forever.”

Almost sounds real, doesn’t it?

Want to leave a real message that has a real chance of getting answered? Be specific and make it easy for them to get back to you. You’ll save the patient without trying someone’s patience.

All the best,

John

Here’s something each of us can say with certainty: We are the center of the universe.

You may have heard something like this from a parent growing up, especially if you were acting selfishly: “The whole world doesn’t revolve around you.” But it does.

If you take the idea of infinity out to a logical conclusion, you can prove my premise that you are the center of the universe and so is everyone else.

There is only one person that can occupy the exact space you’re in right now. No one else can fit there but you. Now imagine lines going out from your body in all directions toward infinity. Now reverse engineer that. Notice exactly where infinity comes back to. It comes back to you. You are the center of infinity; you are the center of the universe.

So what does all of this suggest?

I believe it illustrates that each of us has infinite potential – potential to create well past our self-imposed limitations.

Here’s a mental exercise that will help unlock your infinite potential:

Pretend you are going into a special room where the sole purpose is to tap into your infinite potential and creativity. Before you enter the room, notice and heed the sign on the door: “Leave your limitations outside the room.”

You can certainly claim your limitations on your way out if you want to, but they are not allowed in the room.

You are now in a place with no limitations. What does that feel like? Take time to notice because they are the sensations that are the engine of creativity. Cultivate these sensations with each visit and watch your limitations begin to melt and fade when you’re on the outside of the room.

Infinity is pointing back at you every moment of every day. Just take some time to get your limitations temporarily out of the way and discover who you truly are: The center of the universe.

All the best,

John

The Grasshopper had a unique take on accomplishment: “Getting past what you don’t like.”

I’m sure even someone as sainted as Mother Teresa had people she didn’t like. That didn’t keep her from accomplishing things.

Too often we get stuck on what we don’t like and as a result accomplish a lot less.

I had the good fortune to be the manager of highly skilled radio performers for 12 years. I can assure you that there were some people I didn’t like and many more who didn’t like me. If we were to be successful, we had to get past our dislikes and focus on the common goal: Accomplishment.

When we did that, we accomplished a lot. When we didn’t, not so much.

Whether we’re working as part of a group or on our own towards accomplishment, we will be faced with people and things we don’t like. If we get sidetracked by the noise of contention, we miss the opportunity towards ascension.

I don’t like cleaning rain gutters, but if them being clogged is backing water under my roof shingles and threatening to ruin my ceilings with water damage, I’m on a ladder with a bucket scooping out some of the slimiest, bug infested crap you’ll ever encounter.

There will be plenty of things you don’t like in life. If you retreat from them all, your level of accomplishment will stall.

One school of thought on the road to accomplishment is to do the hardest task first. Do an assessment of what needs to be done in order to accomplish what you’re after and then take on the most disliked task first. The strategy is this: “If I can do that, what could possibly stop me now?”

I find this strategy works best for me. When I put off the hard stuff, it looms like a cloud over my mission and distracts me from performing well even on the easier pieces. Putting off what I don’t like also acts as constant energy drain.

Start small and work your way up. Most people have a pattern for emptying a dishwasher: plates, glasses and cups, silverware. Personally I find sorting the knives, forks and spoons to be the hardest for me. If I save that task for last, it cloud covers the whole experience. When I do it first, the entire task seems to go faster and I have a feeling of accomplishment at the end.

What you don’t like is not an impediment to success; it’s a building block that’s best used at the foundation. I wonder how soon you can accomplish getting past what you don’t like.

All the best,

John

The Grasshopper had this to say yesterday: “If there are no problems, there are no solutions.”

It seemed a bit cryptic to me until I let it settle for a bit.
Here’s what I interpret it to mean: If I don’t think I have a problem, then no solution is necessary.

Here’s my experience: People with problems who don’t recognize them as problems will not seek a solution. It may be clear to anyone but them that there’s a problem, but until they recognize it, there is little hope a solution will ever be found.

How do we get them to notice and acknowledge there’s a problem? I wish I knew. It’s especially upsetting if the person is close to you.

I can tell you from experience that repeatedly telling them there’s a problem is ineffective. After a while, it just engages their polarity response to your assertion. So what can you do?

Again, I don’t have an answer but I know the answer that doesn’t work – “facting” them to death. They’re smart enough to take in the facts you’ve repeatedly offered. They’ve just chosen to discount, deny or ignore them.

I also know from experience that you’re not going to change anyone who doesn’t think they need to change. The change has to come from them. The reality mindset that we have to evolve to for our peace of mind in these situations is this: They will either change or they won’t.

You’ve led this horse to water too many times to count and they have yet to bathe in your pond of reflection. The only mindset that will work for you and me at this stage is to accept their rejection.

They will figure it out or they won’t. That’s the reality we refuse to face. It’s not giving up; it’s finally giving them the un-opinionated space to figure it out on their own, or not.

Helplessness is our most overwhelming fear. To outgrow that feeling it’s helpful for us to recognize that we will never change anyone who doesn’t want to be changed because it’s totally up to them to get their life rearranged.

All the best,

John

I took over three hours of my life to watch a presidential debate last night that seemed anything but presidential, and it really wasn’t the fault of the candidates.

The framework the network (CNN) set up was not to highlight what the candidates’ positions were, but more so an attempt to pit them against one another. Those differences will come out on their own during the natural course of a debate, but to set it up like an MMA event takes presidential politics deeper down a rabbit hole than need be, and leaves us more in the dark.

Even though the network was more concerned with making the debate more bombastic than informative by arranging a few guaranteed car wrecks to ogle, I didn’t get hooked.

It’s because I have a different way of responding to candidates than most people I talk to. I really am not initially evaluating them on their positions, their appearance, their command of the King’s English or their facts. I simply get a feel for the person. Their positions and politics come much later for me.

A person will communicate everything you need to know about them when you pay attention to the sensations you get in your body when you see them. A great way to do this experiment is to record any unscripted event on TV, where you don’t know any of the participants, and watch with the sound turned down. You could be watching a session of the British Parliament on C-SPAN or an episode of Judge Judy. It really doesn’t matter. What matters are the sensations you get. I call it our “Spidey Sense.”

Then, re-watch the the recorded show with the sound turned up and see how spot on your impressions were.

This Spidey Sense method is not judging a book by its cover; it uncovers what people are communicating at an other-than-conscious level which will always be more trustworthy than any opinion you form about their spoken delivery.

Networks know you will get sidetracked by the sideshows. That’s why they arrange for them to happen. It’s great for ratings. Basically they set it up so that the event panders to your prejudice and gives you little chance to get any substance or appreciation for a candidate you may not be rooting for.

I invite you to pay more attention to your unfiltered sensations than you do to your prejudices and you’ll discover your inner Peter Parker.

All the best,

John

I had a phrase pop into my head the other day: “Informing your position.”

Upon reflection, it initially seemed to be about an issue of time management but then morphed into “defending our limitations.”

The time management issue boiled down to this question: How much time do we spend looking for evidence for a position we’ve taken? “A lot” was the answer I came up with.

Oftentimes we take a position on something that we know very little about and then go looking for evidence so that we can defend our limited knowledge.

We only search in one area – the area that will support our position. That’s a limitation.

A successful coach in sports or in life is going to help you improve your strengths and strengthen your weaknesses. If you are only looking to build up your strengths, you will eventually be taken down by your shortcomings.

“Informing your position” is a weakness. Finding out where you are weak and improving upon it will move you further forward than working on what you already claim to know.

Is a drunk leaning on a lamppost for illumination or support? Are you leaning on a position that will expose your limitations? My guess is “Yes,” especially if you’re not willing to find out where your weak link is.

Informing your position has you go to only one well. That’s not only limiting, it’s a guarantee to remain uninformed.

The best negotiators know all the positions before they even begin to dicker. They spend more time investigating your position than they do their own. Their position is second nature to them; yours is a puzzle that needs to be solved, in advance.

Defending our limitations has become a national and global pastime. My thought is this: It’s well past time to stop informing our position and start making the effort to become more informed.

All the best,

John