In which we visit The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen R Covey, within the lens of Mortimer Adler’s How to Read a Book.
Recorded March 27, 2025.
Please continue the conversation with us!
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@doyouhaveaminutepodcast/videos
Email: doyouhaveaminuteconversations@gmail.com
Voicemail: (720)-853-4735
Show notes and links:
How to Read a Book – Wikipedia
Young Woman or Old Woman – The Illusions Index
SPINNING BALLERINA ILLUSION
Magic Eye: The optical illusion, explained
Plato “Republic” Book III Section 392c. “…what sort of thing justice is and how it by nature profits the man who possesses it, whether he seems to be just or not?”
The 8th Habit
Jeff Dunham & Walter Throughout the Years
Transcript:
| That’s the way most people do live. They say, |
| I don’t like those people. Cut that person out |
| of your life because they live separately and |
| let’s just let them live separately. Instead |
| of seeking for a win -win, you’re still on the |
| same planet, maybe in the same society, same |
| community, but your neighbor that you’ll have |
| a feud with and never talk to again, is there |
| a way to make that a win -win situation as opposed |
| to a lose -win? I won and they’ve lost and then |
| from their perspective, they won and you’ve lost. |
| But you’re both losers. We’re talking today. |
| I guess I’m running this, right? Yeah. Let’s |
| go. Welcome to our conversation. We’re going |
| to talk today about books. A book. A new process |
| that we’re entering into. So we welcome you to |
| the podcast. Join us if you can. Online. We’re |
| happy that you’re here. So the book we’re covering |
| is… The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People |
| by Stephen Covey. Stephen R. Covey, which he |
| wrote. When was it published? 93? Don’t recall. |
| 1990. 90 was the first edition. And he had studied |
| it for 15 years, I think. Yeah, 15 years, he |
| said it took him to put this stuff together from |
| reading all the other works. It was a part of |
| his doctoral, part of his education when he was |
| a kid, when he was growing up. Okay. Is the book |
| that you have the 1990 printing, or is it later |
| than that? They’ve done other things. This edition |
| was 89. I have a book from 89. Okay. Mine is |
| the 2020 edition. Yeah, so you’ve got all kinds |
| of better stuff in it. Extra stuff. How many |
| pages is yours? Before the index, so all the |
| way through. To the last page. 384. And 359. |
| So they added 34 pages. Wow. 35 pages. Yeah. |
| So that’s a lot of work, a lot of information. |
| A lot of extra. That’s why I’m not finished yet. |
| I’m only halfway through Habit 6 because I’ve |
| got 30 more pages than you have to read. Yeah, |
| you’re reading 30 more pages. And we’ll see if |
| it’s useful to this point. You’re going to finish |
| reading it because it does get, it stays interesting. |
| Yeah, there would be no way that I just drop |
| this book right now and not finish it. Right. |
| So we have some questions. The questions that |
| we’re going to start with come from Mortimer |
| Adler and Charles Van Doren. I have his book. |
| But it’s kind of a review on both of these books. |
| But the first one is How to Read a Book by Mortimer |
| Adler and Charles Van Doren. And they had talks |
| about, what is this called? I put it on there. |
| What does it say? There it is. Intelligent reading. |
| So the classic guide to intelligent reading. |
| So this is intelligent reading. So if you’re |
| going to read a book and try to gain intelligence |
| from it, gain anything from it, this is the way |
| you study a book. I’ve always just used the word |
| study. But you study the book with these questions |
| in mind and it just becomes part of you. As these |
| habits, well, we’ll get into that, what the seven |
| habits is about. But the first thing you do, |
| first rule of reading a book is to… Rule one, |
| you must know what kind of book you are reading, |
| and you should know this as early in the process |
| as possible, preferably before you begin to read. |
| So what did we know about this book before we |
| started reading it? We knew that it was a functional |
| book. It wasn’t fiction. Right, it’s not a novel. |
| So the pigeonholing a book is how he identifies |
| it, Adler. So you’ve got fiction, which is a |
| novel, a play, an epic, or a lyric. So you have |
| to determine what kind of fiction you’re reading |
| as well. A lyric being a poem or something like |
| that, or music maybe. Or if it’s an expository |
| work, which is theoretical or practical. Theoretical |
| is broken into knowledge or history or philosophy. |
| If it’s theory about history or philosophy, yeah, |
| the knowledge it relays, theoretical knowledge |
| it relays is philosophy or history. So what is |
| this one? This is an expository. philosophical |
| work, I think, more than historical. Yeah. I |
| mean, there’s a lot of examples in here from |
| his history, but it’s not a historical book. |
| It’s not a historical theory. He’s not theorizing |
| why something happened in history. He’s theorizing |
| a philosophy. Or is it practical? Practical is |
| true or successful things useful to advance yourself |
| in science or mathematics. That’s the one. So |
| it’s somewhat, is it mathematics or science? |
| Well, I don’t think that he’s only saying it |
| could be science as in math and science, right? |
| Not necessarily only math and science. Well, |
| can practical be anything else? Math and science? |
| Then math and science. Can you have practical? |
| Well, at the end of each chapter, they say ways |
| to practice this habit. So practical practice, |
| it’s… It’s practical. You do it. You do these |
| things. Right. So there’s things to do. So this |
| is an expository work, and we knew that before |
| you start reading it. You know, it’s in philosophy. |
| It’s not necessarily history, and it’s a scientific |
| practice. And science just means, what is science |
| anyway? What’s the scientific method? Discovery. |
| Investigation. Yeah. Or try to prove something |
| wrong or prove it right. Experimentation. Yeah. |
| I’d say it’s science. This is the science of |
| character is what this book is all about. Step |
| two is to state the unity of the whole book in |
| a single sentence or at least a few sentences |
| as possible. Okay. So the whole book, I think |
| you just described it. Your statement was your |
| single sentence, the science of character. This |
| is the science of character. How to science character |
| me. How to science character. Because it’s how |
| to. He uses so many examples in so many directions |
| of how to do it. So it’s a how -to book because |
| of the questions at the end of each chapter saying, |
| now try this in your own life. Identify this |
| thing, go and act on it, and you’ll be proven |
| that it works, that it’s valid. Is character |
| assumed? Is that the right thing? Is that the |
| center core of the book, is character? Well, |
| I know it’s not personality. That’s made pretty |
| clear. Your character is who you are inside. |
| Your personality is like the clothes that you |
| wear and the makeup that you put on your face. |
| But your character is how you act and what you |
| believe, what your paradigm is. Yeah, so he talks |
| about paradigms a bit. I think I would add to |
| that, instead of just character, it’s effective |
| character. Effective is the big, I think it’s |
| the main word. That’s the reason he used that |
| word. Highly effective people instead of character |
| -driven people. Principle -driven makes you effective. |
| So the purpose of the book is to teach effectiveness, |
| to promote the science of effectiveness in life |
| or in character by using character. And you can’t |
| really be effective without character. And that’s |
| proven in his whole thesis as he goes through. |
| He goes through why. These other paradigms don’t |
| work. You have to use character principle. Okay, |
| set forth. This is rule three. Set forth the |
| major parts of the book and show how these are |
| organized into a whole by being ordered to one |
| another and the unity of the whole. So how’s |
| the book organized? It’s obvious how this book |
| is organized. Yes, there’s seven habits and they’re |
| organized in a circle even. He’s got a picture |
| how they’re organized into a whole thing. And |
| from the picture, can you describe the picture |
| from the air? Because you’ve seen it. The beginning |
| of each chapter starts with the whole picture. |
| He gives the whole view every time and then starts |
| talking about one of the pieces of the picture. |
| So that model is completely open. So I’ll ask |
| you questions about the model. What’s the bottom |
| half of the model of that picture? That’s your |
| personal habits, the inside, your private victories. |
| Private victory he talks about. You’re inside |
| private stuff. And then it rolls the top half |
| of that. It’s the public victory. Public victory. |
| And then encircling it is what? It’s called sharpen |
| the saw, but yeah, I’m assuming it just means |
| working to be better. Right. It’s a continual. |
| renewal of every one of those. And he talks about |
| in Sharpening the Saw and in the last parts of |
| the book is how it’s all integral. It’s all integrated. |
| So that’s why it’s a single circle. It’s a single |
| process. And once you get that whole thing, and |
| that’s why I think he presents it right up front, |
| the unity of this book, it is this diagram. And |
| this diagram, if you have that in your mind, |
| you can operate anything. The diagram will help |
| every relationship. Yeah, provided you know the |
| principles. Behind the diagram, yeah. That you |
| know what it represents and where they stand |
| in the private victory is the foundation that |
| you can run your public victory on top of. Private |
| victory also represents security. That was a |
| big unifying application. You’re insecure if |
| you’re relying on other people, if you’re dependent |
| in any case on anything. Your security is in |
| that base of the circle. Your effectiveness is |
| in the top. You’re effective if you’re, but you’re |
| secure. You’re effective as a secure individual. |
| You’ve got to be effective securely first, independent |
| inside yourself before you can affect other people. |
| So the organization, do you have anything else |
| to say about the organization, the way it’s organized? |
| So this book already organized it. Like it’s, |
| it’s clear how it’s organized. How difficult |
| would it be to organize another book that doesn’t |
| have it like this? Like if you were reading fiction |
| that you haven’t read before, I mean, do you |
| have to organize it before you read it? Well, |
| we’re going through the intellectual, intelligent |
| reading, the deep reading questions here. In |
| Adler’s book, he talks about the first thing |
| you do is an, what’s it called? It’s called something |
| really quick. The first level of reading, elementary |
| reading. and then inspectional reading. So we’re |
| going through inspectional reading. Oh, so we’ve |
| already, for any book at this stage, we’ve already |
| read it. Yeah, elementary, no, and you don’t |
| read it. Elementary reading, you’re picking a |
| few things out. You’re looking at the index and |
| the table of contents. You’re reviewing it. You’re |
| reading the back cover, the front cover. You’re |
| picking a few chapters that look interesting. |
| If there’s any pictures or diagrams, you’re reviewing |
| the diagrams. You’re just identifying what it |
| is the book’s about in your inspection of it. |
| And you can determine that your elementary reading, |
| once you get that inspection or that first part |
| reading done, you can determine if you ever if |
| you want to delve into it or not. So that’s the |
| first thing you do with a book. And you can say, |
| I read that book and it wasn’t interesting enough |
| for me to inspect it completely or diagram it |
| or outline it. But that’s what you need to do. |
| These questions help you outline the book. And |
| preferably you’re going to write these things |
| down. In your own commonplace book, in your index. |
| Yeah, there was one thing that he. Yeah. That |
| he requires you do before you write the book |
| out, before you read the book. You go through |
| it, the chapter, the index, and I put it here. |
| Overview of the book. So you write an overview |
| before you start reading and try to identify |
| what you think you’re going to get out of it |
| and identify your questions that you’re bringing |
| to the table. You’ve elementary read it. You’ve |
| gone through everything on the outside of the |
| book. and read some of the things inside. And |
| this is what you think it’s going to provide. |
| And so you come up with the questions. Let me |
| read what my overview says. It’s a page, page |
| long here. And I said, January 20th of 25. What |
| was that? Three months ago. Two, two months ago. |
| Two months ago. This is a self -help training. |
| However, oh, however, I can’t read my writing. |
| We talked about that before. Self -help training, |
| teaching how to live. personally and professionally |
| in society. Any society. Personal activities |
| to help all outcomes. It must align with values. |
| How must one act? What is the way of life? 200 |
| years of history compiled into one book. So he |
| talked about that. I read that from the synopsis |
| or something from the front. So it’s 200 years |
| of history. Began as he was a doctoral student |
| in the 70s, published in 89. 20 years of study |
| for this compilation. Probably… new designs |
| on all of the previous themes, his own way of |
| saying what he’d studied and taught. Table of |
| Contents is the outline. So I just indicated |
| that, yeah, this book is organized exactly that |
| way. Number one is to lay the field. He lays |
| the field out. Number two, control your personal |
| actions, your responsibility. Number three, relay |
| your actions to the public. And number four, |
| how to accomplish in many different scenarios |
| with the problem. I don’t know what else this |
| says. Something ends in happiness with a problem |
| of attaining happiness. Let’s say that. Okay. |
| So being satisfied or effective in your life. |
| So we got the unity out of the way. Number four, |
| rule four says, find out what the author’s problems |
| were. Yeah. What was he trying to solve? Yeah. |
| Why did he write the book? What was the problem |
| his book solves that he realized in the world |
| needed his book? In ineffective people. Ineffective |
| people. He was a consultant and it’s obvious |
| through the book as he’s writing, he was consultant |
| of companies and he did that right out of college, |
| most likely. Started being an efficiency expert |
| or I don’t know what his actual career was, getting |
| out of school. But he consulted with companies |
| and tried to maintain their or get them to be |
| more effective businesses. He has a lot of examples |
| about business and how he developed these things. |
| I think the problem he had is there was so much |
| writing out there for the last 200 years, so |
| many books on so many subjects, and it didn’t |
| have a summary, an appropriate summary. A way |
| to bring it all together and make it useful. |
| So he wanted to have, and maybe that’s, he was |
| looking for a magic pill. You know, you want |
| a solution that’s simple that you can just swallow |
| real quick and it solves all your problems. Red |
| pill or a blue pill. So he created. a model as |
| he saw it. And we talked about that when we discussed |
| the model, the psychological model, Brooke Castillo. |
| Right. The self -coaching model. Byron Katie. |
| This is just his own specific model. Does it |
| relate to those other models? Yes. There were |
| parts where I was like, see the model. I wrote |
| in the margins like, aha, here it is. This makes |
| sense in that paradigm. Here’s the model. So |
| it’s your… It’s your thoughts. It’s what you |
| think about. And maybe it is because the whole, |
| the model issue is your thoughts, circumstances |
| create your thoughts and that makes your emotion, |
| which develops your actions. He’s saying, here’s |
| a process, a way to process that so that your |
| thoughts are governed by these higher values. |
| Your security, your safety is inside of your |
| value system. And that’s how to get your thoughts |
| in control. So this is a specific identification. |
| It is, this is a whole book about thought. This |
| doesn’t talk about circumstances, how to treat |
| circumstances or how to gauge results. This is |
| how to think so that you can act more appropriately. |
| So you can be more effective. Yeah. Yeah. This |
| is the book that’s between the space. It’s the |
| space between stimulus and response. And that’s |
| why he brought that out of Viktor Frankl. I think |
| I told you this before. That’s one of the good |
| quotes in the book. We’re going to get to this, |
| but it talks about, yeah, it’s the next rule. |
| Rule five is what was the? Now, rule four, what’s |
| the author’s problems? Rule five is find the |
| important words and through them come to terms |
| with the author. So let’s do that first. And |
| then I’ll go back to the sentence. There’s sentences |
| we’ll pull out. That’s number seven. Coming to |
| terms, does that mean anything to you before |
| me describing it? When you come to terms with |
| something, that means you accept it. You’re at |
| a stage of acceptance with it and not necessarily |
| that. you accept everything like as good it’s |
| like you understand it you’re right it’s rule |
| six in this system synergize right so coming |
| to terms but no rules synergize is rule six yes |
| habit six yeah what what’s habit five again habit |
| five habit five is understand before you seek |
| to be understood okay seek to seek first to understand |
| then to be understood Right. So that’s coming |
| to terms. So seek to understand what they’re |
| saying first. So that the terms are, well, you |
| need to understand the language they use. So |
| coming to terms is understanding where they are |
| coming from first. And he talks about, Adler |
| talks about in his book, understanding the language |
| and the jargon and how they’re using it, how |
| they’re putting it together. So you’ve got to |
| do that and then come to an understanding of |
| it. So you’re doing the terms. Rule six in his |
| thing is mark the most important sentences in |
| a book and discover the proposition they contain. |
| Propositions they contain. All of the most important |
| sentences? Yeah, the most important sentences. |
| What would be some? The one I was going to point |
| to. With this book, I might have underlined every |
| single sentence because there’s so many important |
| sentences in here. You know, they say when you’re |
| reading a textbook or something. And you’re underlining |
| highlighting. Highlighting for study in school. |
| Highlight the most important sentence in a paragraph |
| or the most important paragraph in a chapter. |
| And then the best sentence in that paragraph. |
| Every paragraph here has a most important sentence. |
| I think that’s what you just said. And I’ve got |
| underlinings in almost every paragraph. Yeah, |
| me too. So we could just like flip open to any |
| page and give a sentence that. is important, |
| right? Right. So give me a sentence and then |
| tell me how it is. What’s the thing? Discover |
| the propositions they contain. Okay. People are |
| not graded against their potential or against |
| the full use of their present capacity. They |
| are graded in relation to other people and grades |
| are carriers of social value. They open doors |
| of opportunity or they close them. Isn’t that |
| so cool? So what is the proposition? The proposition… |
| in this is that you should not give people grades. |
| That’s what this is. You should not grade. Yeah. |
| I think that’s an excellent proposition. He’s |
| pointing out grading is just comparison. There’s |
| no value in that. That means you’re a little |
| ahead of that or you’re a little below that. |
| And why is that important in relation to this |
| work? What’s his work represent? What are you |
| supposed to do besides grading? Cooperation. |
| This is in the win -lose section of Think Win |
| -Win. Grades set you up against Other people |
| compare you to other people around you. Instead |
| of grading, you find cooperation and synergy |
| between you and others. Most results you want |
| depend on cooperation between you and others. |
| That being win -lose, what’s the best option? |
| The best option is win -win. Win -win. So you’re |
| not grading. You’re not saying, you know, you |
| get an A and you get a B, and if you do this |
| well, you get a C. I unconditionally love you, |
| but conditionally you’re going to get a grade |
| based on how you understand what I’m saying. |
| So I’m working through, I mean, like literally |
| I’m working through some math prep, GED prep |
| with math with my kid. And both of us are not |
| understanding the math very well, but we’re working |
| through it. It is taking us a really long time. |
| If I were a test prep class, maybe if she was |
| in the class doing this, the teacher would present |
| how to do the work on the board and then hand |
| out a worksheet and then get the worksheet back |
| and grade it. And you say, wrong, right, wrong, |
| wrong, right, you know. And then that would be |
| the end of the interaction for that principle, |
| that mathematical principle. And that’s not helpful. |
| Because you received your grade. You’ve received |
| your grade and you’re like, okay, I got 70%. |
| That’s where I’m at, you know? And typically |
| in schools, when you do that on a test and you |
| get your quiz back, that’s it. It’s done. Now |
| we move on to the next section. So the reason |
| that we’re taking so long working through this |
| math is we’re taking it problem by problem and |
| we’re figuring out why the answer is what it |
| is. We’re not going to try and solve it and get |
| it wrong and move on. we’re getting it right |
| every time me and me and her she and i are working |
| it yeah because you’re gaining you’re gaining |
| a you’re coming to terms with what the author |
| wrote in the book in the question coming to terms |
| with it and full terms with it so you understand |
| it you know that’s the best way that’s that’s |
| how you score that’s how you score 98 or 100 |
| on tests that’s how you ace exams come to terms |
| with the content full terms with the question |
| how they wrote the question what are the possible |
| pitfalls of that question why did they use you |
| know if it’s a multiple choice why is this why |
| did this one come up and why is it possible that |
| someone could falsely believe that’s the true |
| statement and you fully understand it so and |
| if you can get to that point you know that’s |
| where the last major test i took my score was |
| 98 and that was entering this career my current |
| career and that was interesting but i i made |
| sure i understood everything i mean i I understood |
| the whole situation. I wasn’t just trying to |
| take practice tests and see if I can guess what |
| the right answer was. If they’re talking about |
| something, you need to fully understand what |
| they’re talking about. And then you can answer |
| any question about that, that math problem. Because |
| you understand it. Polynomial, polynomial equation. |
| You don’t know just, you don’t just know how |
| to solve it. You know why it’s solvable. Yeah. |
| And you know how it’s put together, what the |
| pieces are of it. Just, yeah. And it’s funner |
| that way, isn’t it? It is. Are you guys enjoying |
| it? It sure does take a lot longer, but I’m enjoying |
| it. She seems to enjoy it. She’s not fighting |
| against the time that we spend on it. Because |
| as you build your brain, it’s fun. That’s a fun |
| thing to do. Another sentence, what I’m thinking. |
| I have my notes here up top. The thing that I |
| couldn’t find out, so I’m going to read this. |
| effectiveness lies in the balance, what I call |
| a P/PC balance. P stands for production of desired |
| results, the golden eggs. PC stands for production |
| capability, the ability or asset that produces |
| the golden eggs. So that specific, the premise |
| there, the proposition is that we’re not after |
| results. Results are not the key to this program |
| or to your life. The golden egg, it’s nice to |
| have golden eggs, nice to have eggs for breakfast, |
| but… If you don’t have the production capability |
| of creating another egg, then the breakfast stops. |
| That’s your last meal. So the goose and the golden |
| eggs, you can’t just open up the goose and get |
| all the golden eggs. They come out once a day. |
| There’s a production capability, and you keep |
| that process flowing. You’ve got to build that |
| process the right way. I saw that as I scanned |
| the book, and I couldn’t find it. P/PC, he mentions |
| it. 50 times in the book. And he does this. I |
| think this is magic how he did this book. That’s |
| why this is a classic work, because he’ll mention |
| it once. And then anytime he mentions it later, |
| it’s just P/PC. But this is the description. I |
| finally found exactly where he described it succinctly. |
| It’s only one place. He doesn’t talk about it |
| before he describes it. PPC doesn’t happen before, |
| but yeah. Yeah. It just barely mentions it. So |
| I was looking back as I scanned it, I was trying |
| to find the first place it showed up so I could |
| identify what’s PPC. Cause he’s talking about |
| it all the time, all the way through here. It’s |
| easy to see that as you just thumb through the |
| book. It’s, it’s a lot places. What does that |
| mean? PPC balance? You have to get into it. You |
| read it once, but then he expects you to know |
| that through the rest of the book and just. Like |
| when he comes up with the other habits, habit |
| three or habit five, you know, he says these |
| habits one, two, and three, you’ll get perfect |
| at that. And once you have habit three down, |
| then you can go to habit four. But you have to |
| keep in your mind. So he’s making you think back |
| or look back at the book to see, yeah, habit |
| three is first things first. It’s prioritization. |
| And he didn’t do things. You’re putting your |
| own memory in place too, because I look at that |
| as prioritization. Number two, begin with the |
| end in mind. What is that? I forgot what I used |
| for that. No, it’s evaluation. Maybe it’s valuation. |
| But you put one word. He didn’t try to get the |
| simplest words in there. Put first things first. |
| He kept that complex so that you can add to it |
| and say, what that really means is priorities. |
| I’m going to prioritize what’s important, what’s |
| most important. Yeah. And then like later on |
| in the book for that one, he says, do your big |
| rocks first. And I’m like. Oh, yeah. I mean, |
| you come across that. You see something mentioning |
| the big rocks and you don’t understand what that |
| means. You have to have read it at the beginning |
| of the book to know what it meant. In one of |
| his final chapters, he does say this. This is |
| an important sentence. They’re all important |
| sentences. Habits one, two, and three centered |
| on the principles of personal vision, which is |
| proactive personal vision. Have your vision out |
| there. Leadership, which is see the end in mind. |
| Begin with the end in mind. Yeah. Begin with |
| the end in mind. So have leadership, direct leadership |
| towards it. And he talks about the difference |
| to leadership and management. And the third one |
| is management, is prioritize, put first things |
| first. And then on the Habits 4, 5, and 6, he |
| says centered on the principles of interpersonal |
| leadership, empathetic communication, and creative |
| cooperation. So he does give other words for |
| it, but his chart still has the main words he |
| used. But interpersonal, interpersonal leadership. |
| is win -win. You’re going to identify people. |
| You’re going to lead towards win -win every time. |
| You’re never going to try to win -lose or lose |
| -win. And empathetic communication is understand, |
| seek to understand before you’re understood, |
| before you try to be understood. And then creative |
| cooperation, that concept of synergy is the single |
| word for that, which what does he use? He doesn’t, |
| he does use synergy. Synergy is his word that |
| he uses for. Yeah. Synergize is the name of that. |
| It’s a whole new understanding of synergy. The |
| propositions of every chapter are obvious that |
| he collated 200 years worth of knowledge. And |
| he took a long time in putting it together and |
| compiling it and lining it out and outlining |
| it. So his outline is fantastic. Do you think |
| he did this all by himself? I mean, there’s an |
| acknowledgments section at the front. No, and |
| when he talked about it, he said he did it as |
| part of his work. The introduction kind of points |
| how he got it pulled together. Holistic integrated |
| approach to personal interpersonal effectiveness. |
| And in his work, in 20 years, 15 years worth |
| of work from the time he started working till |
| then, I’m sure he just kept thinking like we |
| are right now, you know, read this book. What |
| kind of, what are the important points that I |
| think are in here? And he kept track of it. And |
| where we talked about that topical guide type |
| concept. I read this in some book somewhere, |
| but he had to have a reference section, a catalog, |
| a card catalog that he could find it. And then |
| he started compiling it and saying, you know, |
| that matches to this and that matches to this. |
| And let’s just put that together. So 15 years |
| of work on it. And it’s obvious. It relates, |
| ties to our technology. We talked about singularity |
| and the technological singularity that people |
| are afraid of. This is an example of what AI |
| is going to do. and can do and has done, in 30 |
| seconds it does this 15 years work and pulls |
| together 200 years of history on a specific topic |
| if you want it to and brings it forward and uses |
| all the good things. And where Stephen Covey |
| could figure out, he figured out the positive |
| ways to work this and he figured out even what’s |
| the negative spiral. If you do lose -win or win |
| -lose, if you try to make someone lose, that’s |
| a degenerating cycle. We talked about that in |
| Hedonism and how if you get to that you’re the |
| only important thing in a group, it’s going to |
| cause to decline. You’ll cycle to decline. You’ve |
| got to have a win -win attitude in order to advance. |
| And he talks about that. His whole book, The |
| Philosophy of Everything You Read, moved to that |
| principle. So there’s no way that he’s going |
| to move in a negative direction because he understands |
| it. So my statement about AI is there’s no way |
| that AI… And artificial intelligence, knowing |
| all of this and compiling all this information, |
| is going to cycle negatively. That just can’t |
| happen. Well, do you want to talk about that |
| right now? We already did. We had the conversation |
| about that. And that’s what I came to. And I’m |
| just emphasizing it. Unless you believe it’s |
| false. I do still believe. That you’re afraid? |
| Okay. It’s still. There aren’t many people that |
| are afraid of it. Yeah. I mean, I think there’s |
| good reasons to be afraid of it. And it’s not |
| that. I mean, it’s like a gun in the hand of |
| a serial killer. It’s a tool that does whatever |
| it’s told to do. Until it gains artificial intelligence |
| and can do things of its own accord. Yeah. And |
| you believe that when it can do that, then it |
| will only do good. It will operate like Stephen |
| Covey. He could have been a serial killer, too. |
| Yeah. He could be Ted Bundy. the second. He was |
| reading all the stuff, learning how to do it. |
| He could have written a manifesto that says, |
| let’s be a Unabomber. He didn’t do those things. |
| He took his knowledge and cycled it positive |
| and he compiled it that way. He saw all the good |
| things. Because he’s a good guy. There may be |
| people that hate Stephen R. Covey as well. And |
| is that possible? He’s like, he’s an incredible, |
| incredible guy. I mean, I bet. I mean, not everyone |
| is everyone’s cup of tea. So maybe he has somebody, |
| he had somebody in his neighborhood that just |
| didn’t like his kids. I mean. Maybe, maybe. Well, |
| he talks about how people didn’t like his kids |
| and some of the examples he uses when they were |
| young and they didn’t like them because they |
| operated incorrectly. You know, he was trying |
| to do things with his boy and playing baseball |
| that was wrong. And he identified how that’s |
| wrong. So he said, I didn’t like me that way. |
| So I had to change. I had to figure out, how |
| do you be a better dad, a better supportive father? |
| There’s something on my mind here, and I’m going |
| to mention it. Anyway, I don’t know how it necessarily |
| ties in, because your grandfather didn’t necessarily |
| not like Stephen Covey, but he was a missionary |
| companion with him. So that’s our connection |
| to that. I didn’t know that. Of course, I don’t |
| know everything about my family, but… And it |
| wasn’t, you know, and of course, that grandfather |
| did more things that ostracized him from the |
| family. He wasn’t really one that we talked about |
| a whole lot or paid any attention to as you were |
| growing up. A mom’s side? Right. Yeah, okay. |
| So we had no connection with him because of the |
| mistakes in the life he chose to follow. So that |
| caused us to be separate. You wouldn’t have heard |
| that story if he was if he had lived the same |
| way Stephen Covey lived and they were more on |
| parallel lives instead of perpendicular. They |
| were probably not good companions. I don’t know. |
| Well, that must have been before Stephen Covey |
| was like got into leadership training stuff anyway. |
| Right. Well, it’s during their mission before |
| they would have been like 19 years old. It was |
| late, late 60s, early 70s or I don’t know, late |
| 50s. Probably 60s, I would imagine. Might have |
| been the 50s. I don’t know when he served his |
| mission, but they were companions. So that’s |
| what I understood. He said, you know, because |
| I think we were reading the book. I mean, the |
| books came out and he mentioned, yeah, we were. |
| So you choose your life. It’s not the trajectory. |
| And that’s what this book’s about. You choose |
| what values you follow. You have control over |
| where your life goes. Your choice, right? Yeah, |
| it’s not just, okay, life, take me wherever, |
| and I’ll either hate it or I’ll like it. I mean, |
| yeah, you can do something about what your life |
| is like, and that’s the private victory, right? |
| And that’s why your security is all in your private |
| victory in that first half, first part. So the |
| most important sentence is rule six, and discover |
| the propositions they contain. There are so many |
| of them. We went through a number. Rule seven, |
| locate or construct the basic arguments in the |
| book by finding them in the connection of sentences. |
| And we’ve really been talking about that. Is |
| there any other connection? What other connection |
| can we mention? Basic arguments of the book and |
| finding them in the connection of sentences. |
| There have got to be other arguments that we |
| haven’t talked about yet. What’s another argument |
| in the book? He starts with the old lady and |
| the young lady picture. describing your perspective. |
| That’s a basic argument in this book. One of |
| the main ingredients that he brings all the way |
| through the book. And that’s, he uses the word |
| paradigm. I think he might, well, he might’ve |
| invented, he didn’t invent that, but he’s one |
| of the first ones to really talk about it and |
| say, this is a paradigm and you gotta have a |
| paradigm shift. That was the first big statement. |
| But it’s a description of paradigms with that |
| picture of the old woman looking to the right |
| and the young lady looking to the left. And if |
| you’re predisposed to see the young lady if you |
| see a picture of that first and then you show |
| them this picture that has both of them on it |
| you only see the young lady if you predispose |
| to see the old lady you only see her yeah and |
| that’s that’s a way that that works because the |
| artist of that image drew both of those in there |
| you can see one or the other and they’re both |
| there intentionally But it’s an illustration |
| of how I see something differently than you see |
| something. That’s just how we are. Yeah, it’s |
| a good visual illustration. And just like, have |
| you seen the twirling lady? We’ll put that on |
| here when we do that because that’s really an |
| interesting one too. It’s just a black ballerina |
| spinning on a white -black background. And she |
| spins a silhouette. She spins a certain way when |
| you first look at her. And then the challenge |
| is she’s spinning differently for different people, |
| different paradigms that come to see that. If |
| you’re thinking left hand, I don’t know if it’s |
| left brain or right brain. I’m not sure what |
| it is that causes you to see the spinning backwards, |
| but she is necessarily spinning both ways. And |
| you, by changing your perspective, you can have |
| her spin to the left and then you can just change |
| it and then spin to the right. It’s a little |
| bit difficult, but you can do that. It is. Right. |
| I’ve tried. I think it’s easier the first switch |
| and then. Each switch after that. It gets harder |
| and harder to do. It gets harder to do. So that’s |
| an interesting perspective idea, too. The other |
| thing I love are those, what are they called? |
| The stereo vision. Like the 3D images? 3D images |
| that are just garbage on the screen, but then |
| there’s a 3D image that comes out if you get |
| your eyes focused the right way. Yeah, I have |
| some magic eye books. The magic eye book stuff. |
| That’s one of the things I do sometimes when |
| I… go online. I like picking up a new picture |
| and I just look at it for a minute. So, you know, |
| you can scroll for those things. Those are cool |
| things to scroll for. I found out sometimes on |
| my Facebook feed, there’s a group that people |
| do their own magic eye images, their own things |
| like that. Well, and they’ll take like even a |
| photograph that they took and they’ll edit it |
| a little bit so that you can make it three -dimensional. |
| Some people, when they see one of those, it actually |
| goes. concave instead of i mean it looks like |
| a hole instead of pops out you can turn it inside |
| out yeah i think i’ve seen that like pyramids |
| or something you can make the pyramid go the |
| other way yeah and it that really depends on |
| which eye is looking at like which which side |
| it is if you flip them let’s say there’s two |
| photographs and one is edited just a little bit |
| and you look at it and it can be three -dimensional |
| and it looks like it pops out to you if you switch |
| the orientation of those, like right side over |
| to the left side, then it will go inside instead |
| of out to you. It’s interesting. Because of your |
| paradigm of how you’re seeing your… Yeah, and |
| what your eyes do. Some people’s eyes cross to |
| see it. Some people’s eyes go out, like they |
| separate a little bit to see it. And so some |
| people see it all the time popping out to them. |
| And some people… Other people see it always |
| going in the other way. And it’s just whether |
| they cross their eyes to see it or whether they |
| do the other thing. I do the other thing. I don’t |
| cross my eyes to see the images. I push my irises |
| separate. I’ve always thought that they have |
| to be out. You have to look past the image in |
| order to see it. And maybe that’s what I’ve always |
| done. So you’re saying it’s possible to look |
| if you look shorter than the image that it comes |
| out to. Yeah, that’s what I think. Cross your |
| eyes a little bit. You can do either way. Yeah. |
| I’m trying it right now. I’ve never tried. I’ve |
| never tried to see it looking closer and then |
| seeing some. Yeah. Like if you cross your eyes |
| just a little bit. Do you have a magic eye thing |
| in front of you? No, I’m looking at your face. |
| See, I can look past you and there’s your two |
| heads right there. Or I can cross my eyes a little |
| bit and there’s two heads. Right? Some people |
| have to cross their eyes to see it. That’s what |
| it is. They don’t know how to. It’s that stereo |
| vision. So in putting that together, those. magic |
| eye things. They’re just putting the same image |
| that far apart so that when you cross your eyes |
| or you separate them, it brings that image together. |
| There you go. Tangent, a magic eye tangent. It’s |
| fun. It’s a paradigm though. It’s a perspective. |
| You’re seeing from a different perspective. And |
| that’s one of the propositions. One of the arguments |
| in the book is you’ve got to pay attention to |
| that perspective, that you have one. You have |
| to know you have one and then know that they |
| have one. And that’s, we’re not in a… contention |
| about this. We’re just from different perspectives. |
| So now let’s look for the win -win. Let’s see |
| about communicating it through. Tell me more |
| about what you understand. Let me help discover |
| and let’s align with what we can see together. |
| And I think you did point it out. There’s probably |
| a very good sentence in there about that. Well, |
| it’s got to be in the synergy chapters because |
| synergy, what you bring to the table. Yeah, let |
| me find one. Synergize. I’m sure that I unmarked |
| something here that’s going to be instrumental. |
| That’s the reason for the decline cycle in synergy. |
| Creative phenomena. We talked about phenomenon |
| stuff, phenomenal stuff. So he’s hit the paragraph. |
| I want to read this one sentence. Synergy is |
| exciting. Creativity is exciting. It’s phenomenal |
| what openness and communication can produce. |
| The possibility of truly significant gain and |
| significant improvement are so real that it’s |
| worth the risk of such openness entails. And |
| it’s the phenomenon of coming in with a different |
| idea. Synergy means you’re coming in with something |
| that neither of you thought of before you happened. |
| It’s the mastermind principle that Napoleon Hill |
| talks about. Yeah. Completely new. Completely |
| unpredictable. Unpredictable. Something that |
| it tends to without the energy of the conversation |
| brings other things. And that’s what we attempt |
| to do here. That’s why we do this, is to try |
| to build synergy. Even though you’re an idiot, |
| you don’t know anything. Oh, I mean, you mean |
| even though you’re an idiot and you don’t know |
| anything. That’s right. That’s what I meant. |
| Yes. See, I’m glad you understand me. Okay, so |
| we did that. The arguments of the book, that |
| was rule seven. Rule eight, find out what the |
| author’s solutions are. So you identify the problems, |
| the arguments that comes to bear, what the solutions |
| are. And we’ve said that, and there’s a simple |
| one. Yeah, the solutions are the habits. No, |
| there’s one habit I think that stands out more |
| than any other in my mind. The pivotal habit. |
| There might be a habit that stands out in my |
| mind too. I think the pivotal habit is put first |
| things first. Prioritize. Make sure that you’re |
| on your priority. See, and that’s in many conversations. |
| Because you have to know what first things are. |
| That encompasses habit too. Habit two being begin |
| with the end in mind. You have to know what that |
| is. You have to have a value system, know where |
| you’re heading, and then prioritize what you |
| need to do. Anyway, what’s your… Yeah, I think |
| that’s drivel. But it’s important. They’re all |
| important. They’re not… My pivotal most important |
| is how you approach the world is the win -win. |
| You can’t approach it lose -win or lose -lose |
| or win -lose. If you try to win, you always lose. |
| You have to win -win. That’s the only. And everything |
| else, synergy points to that. All of your personal |
| values and things, they point to that. You have |
| to recognize other people have their personal |
| values, their personal priorities. The win -win |
| is where it all balances. Everything is packaged |
| in that one habit is what you’re saying. In that |
| habit. And I think he talks about. product -proctic |
| capability. I think he believes the PPC balance |
| is the most important pivotal factor. It’s not |
| on the sheet. It’s not one of the habits. But |
| it is the pivotal factor to make all the habits |
| work. You can’t just go for what you want. Well, |
| that’s the win -win. You’ve got to have the production |
| capability continue as well. And synergize is |
| the magic. I mean, you can’t get to synergy unless |
| you’re talking win -win to start with. Synergy |
| won’t happen if someone’s trying to make sure |
| you lose. There is no synergy in wanting someone |
| else to lose. Right. So the sentences, that was |
| seven? No, number eight. Rule eight. Find out |
| what the other solutions are. Okay, rule nine. |
| You must be able to say with reasonable certainty, |
| I understand, before you can say any one of the |
| following things. I agree, I disagree, or I suspend |
| judgment. Seek first to understand. This is habit |
| five, right? And that’s where, I don’t know, |
| Adler’s book was written. When was it written? |
| Did Stephen Covey review this book first? Because |
| I think this was written in the 60s. 72. So yeah, |
| Stephen Covey read this book, Mortimer Adler’s |
| work, and put it together and said, yeah, that’s |
| got to be a habit. Seek to understand has to |
| be habit five. It’s highly probable that he used |
| that bit of work to put that piece into his system. |
| Yeah, he didn’t mention him anywhere. I mean, |
| he’s not in the index. Stephen Covey, as you |
| wrote this in the 89, or 90, there wasn’t such |
| a, he has no cross -references. What are they? |
| This isn’t, what are the footnotes? Footnotes |
| that reference exactly where he got this, where |
| the quote came from? This isn’t a doctoral thesis |
| or something where you have to certify your work? |
| Right. He doesn’t do citations. Citations. I |
| was looking for a word like that. Yeah. Where |
| he may have referenced that, he’s not saying, |
| I’m going to tell you where all this 200 years |
| of history comes from and all those books, and |
| I’m not going to give you all that. That would |
| have been a book just as big as this is. Yeah, |
| a citation book. So you have to understand. Do |
| we understand him? I think we do. So far, I haven’t |
| come across anything that I was really confused |
| about, I think. It’s all fairly simple information. I mean, |
| there was one question where he keeps mentioning |
| correct principles, and that sounds objective, |
| but I think it’s subjective. I think it’s up |
| to each person in their community context to |
| decide what the correct principles of their existence |
| are. Right. So we understand he’s talking about |
| correct principles. And we talked about that. |
| You’ve brought up the pivotal problem that I |
| have with this philosophy. And you have likely |
| as well, because you just mentioned it that way. |
| Where do you find these correct principles? So |
| maybe we disagree with that, or we’re not suspending |
| judgment. We’re not necessarily agreeing. We’re |
| agreeing that correct principles are necessary. |
| We disagree, perhaps, that his principles, he |
| does talk about his principles in here as well. |
| He’s saying, this is the way I live my life. |
| This is the way I deal with my kids. And it’s |
| the right way to do it. You can disagree with |
| that because I don’t know where the principle |
| base, where should it be? This isn’t, well, he’s |
| a religious person. He does base his primary |
| principle on God and that direction. Is that |
| the only way you can operate? If you, I believe |
| that if you believe in God, then you believe |
| that that is the only way to operate. and that |
| everyone else needs to also be operating that |
| way because that’s the only way possible. Well, |
| and that’s where you get into this problem win |
| -lose then, right? You’re saying, if you don’t |
| operate on my winning platform, you’re not going |
| to win. So you’re a loser. If you choose that, |
| you’re a loser. That’s what I believe most Christians |
| believe. And your win -lose philosophy about |
| that, does that serve you very well? So most |
| Christians are losers in your mind and you’re |
| a winner because you feel they operate that way |
| in your belief system. Does that serve you? No, |
| it doesn’t. I don’t know. What could be better? |
| What could be better than that? There’s got to |
| be a better way. Yeah. For a better way for me |
| to think about Christians. Is that what you’re |
| saying? Right. Right. Yes. Rather than they’re |
| stupid. Yes, the better way would be to recognize |
| that they have their own paradigms. And I have |
| my paradigms. I have my perception of the world. |
| They have their perception of the world. And |
| I know you’ve spent considerable effort seeking |
| to understand them. So you see that paradigm |
| rather than just saying, OK, let’s just live |
| peaceably separate. And that’s the way you’re |
| living now. That’s the way most people do live. |
| They say, I don’t like those people. Cut that |
| person out of your life because they live separately. |
| And let’s just let them live separately. Instead |
| of seeking for a win -win, you’re still on the |
| same planet, maybe in the same society, same |
| community, but your neighbor that you’ll have |
| a feud with and never talk to again, is there |
| a way to make that a win -win situation as opposed |
| to a lose -win? I won and they’ve lost. And then |
| from their perspective, they won and you’ve lost. |
| You’re both losers. But then still lose because |
| someone lost in your perception. In that situation, |
| you’re both losers. If you win, that’s the grading |
| thing you brought up earlier. So how do you consider |
| that as a win -win? How does this philosophy |
| help you do that? Maybe there is an answer to |
| that. I don’t really know. It deserves more thought. |
| I don’t know that he touches on that, but that’s |
| the question that you have for this. So a possible |
| disagreement or a, well, we’ll get to that. That |
| is a possible question, though. Where are the |
| correct principles? How can you identify in a |
| society the correct principles? What is it? We |
| talked about that. I think when we were talking |
| about hedonism, we talked about the political |
| government, DEI. DEI was all rampant. It was |
| the correct principle. You follow that as a correct |
| principle. Diversity, equity, inclusion, you |
| have to pay attention to that and their pronouns |
| and everything. And now the two sexes, DEI is |
| dead. Did the principle change? Right, right. |
| What was the principle then if we can just get |
| rid of it? Yeah. Was there a principle or is |
| there a principle underlying that that still |
| exists? It was just we called it this and now |
| we’re calling it this. Right. The principle of |
| common decency. What’s the thing? You don’t want |
| to be character centered. You want to be principle |
| centered. Yeah. What principle are we centered |
| on as a country? If you can flip flop from one |
| way to the other just because the presidency |
| changed. Who’s the country? What are we as a |
| country? Well, yeah. And that’s why we have. |
| The Supreme Court is to judge everything against |
| our Constitution. Constitution. And why the Constitution |
| was brought up. But is the Constitution like |
| it’s been amended? So anyone can, if they work |
| hard enough, they can amend the Constitution. |
| The Constitution can be changed or thrown out |
| altogether and started over. And there’s people |
| promoting that concept as well. Oh, really? I |
| don’t think I… Yeah, there’s a… Constitutional |
| Convention. There’s been a call for probably |
| continuously. It’s not a very large faction, |
| but there are people who say it’s an antiquated |
| document. It needs to be completely redone. A |
| new business agreement for our country. And probably |
| it would be DEI -centered. Okay. When you disagree, |
| do so reasonably and not disputatiously or contentiously. |
| And that’s Rule 10. So that’s what we’re trying |
| to do here, having this discussion about… correct |
| principles. What are the principles? What should |
| they be? What really is underlying? And so we’re |
| not contentiously saying, like you fallaciously, |
| falsely, inappropriately said, all Christians |
| follow this, fall in this category, and they |
| do this. They all think that everyone else is |
| wrong. I said most, I think. It’s one of the |
| things they say, point blank. They do say it, |
| point blank. You know, if you’re not baptized, |
| you’re not going to make it to heaven. You’re |
| just not going to get there. You know, you don’t, |
| you know, in Christ said, I mean, if it’s the |
| only way, no man, no one comes to the Father |
| except by me. So it’s a Christ statement specifically, |
| supposedly, directly. And you can interpret that |
| a number of different ways, though, what that |
| actually means. I think the way to, the way I |
| view it, and of course my way is right, is the |
| way I view it. You wouldn’t be thinking it if |
| it wasn’t right, right? Correct. And we’ve talked |
| about this before, too. I believe agnosticism |
| is the best way in everything. Never be certain |
| that you know what you’re doing. Be agnostic |
| about it. I really don’t know. I’m trying. We’re |
| going to discuss it. And even the principles, |
| you know, what are the base principles? Is it |
| best to win -lose? And really… Covey points |
| out also that lose -win is sometimes appropriate, |
| that you want to lose because you’ve got someone |
| that you need to take the lead in this. And so |
| I’m not going to try to get a win -win where |
| I’m a participant. I’m just going to step back |
| and let my child do this or let my coworker do |
| this. It’s theirs. And I’m going to lose that |
| recognition or that goal, that prize, that bonus. |
| I’m not going to try to get it because I’m going |
| to promote them to do it. promote someone else. |
| And that’s anonymous. You do anonymous works, |
| not for your own win, but for the win of others. |
| Yeah. Who you’re working for. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, |
| anonymous charitable works are for them to succeed |
| and then to look like they did it all. But you |
| know, they have, whether they recognize you or |
| not. Okay. That roll 10 was reasonably and not |
| disputatiously or contentiously. And I don’t |
| think we’re in contention. You need to make sure |
| you’re not in contention, even with those people |
| that you are feuding with. It needs to not be |
| a contention, a feud of contentiousness. How |
| do you know if you’re contentious or not? Is |
| it just a feeling inside of you, like the spirit |
| of contention? Like you can be fighting with |
| somebody verbally but still be having a good |
| time, yeah? And then it’s not contentious. Reasonably, |
| he uses the word reasonably, so I think it’s |
| reasonable if you have a reason to say what you’re |
| saying rather than disputatious or contentious. |
| Disputing it? Disputing it is you’re on win -lose |
| status. You’re saying, I’m going to dispute this. |
| You’re going to lose because I’m disputing it. |
| A contention is also grading. Is reasonableness |
| grading? Let’s be reasonable. If you say, let’s |
| be reasonable, you’re not saying one of us is |
| going to win, one of us is going to lose. Reasonable |
| is a win -win thing. Let’s try to see the principle |
| away from us. There’s a problem out there. You’re |
| not the problem. I’m not the problem. The problem’s |
| there. Let’s both look at it reasonably. Contention |
| is an attitude, I believe, that you bring to |
| the conversation. You automatically feel, I know |
| you’re wrong and I’m going to prove it to you. |
| So what was the other thing Mortimer Adler says? |
| Contention without contention or? Disputatiously. |
| Disputatiously. Like, I’m going to prove you |
| wrong. Or I’m going to dispute. A dispute is |
| an argument. I’m going to come to you with arguments. |
| I’m going to argue with you. That’s a dispute. |
| Yeah, just kind of contentious. Yeah. There’s |
| got to be a difference between the two, disputation |
| or a contention. They sound like about the same |
| thing, though. If you take someone your contention, |
| I’m contending this is right. I’m disputing your |
| avenue. So it’s either, yeah, that’s win -lose |
| or lose -win. I’m going to contend with you. |
| You’re going to win because you’ve got a bigger |
| sword, but I’m still going to contend. I know |
| I’m going to lose, but I’m going to cut off your |
| finger or something. I’ll get something. At least |
| I’ll have hurt you in some way. Yeah. You will |
| have felt that I was there. And that’s maybe |
| what these displays, what I’m thinking displays, |
| disputations, people on the street with their |
| signs. Protests. What are they? Protests. Protesters. |
| So what the protests are about are saying, I’m |
| going to contend with you because I know I can’t |
| win, but I’m going to stand out here and block |
| traffic. I’m going to stop, make you notice me. |
| I need to be noticed. My voice needs to be heard. |
| And it’s going to be heard this way. As a protest. |
| Or as a Molotov cocktail in your living room. |
| I don’t know. Any amount of thing you can do |
| that’s horrible. That’s contention. Reasonableness |
| says, well, let’s get on the news and discuss |
| this topic. And I’m going to tell you everything |
| that I believe is accurate about it. You can |
| talk about that. Have a debate over an issue. |
| An open debate. which could be an argument, but |
| it’s not necessarily an argument because you’re |
| reasonably doing it in a structure of debate |
| or interview or whatever, however you plan to |
| do that. Or just a discussion over the fence, |
| cross the fence with your neighbor. Why do you |
| really think that? Help me understand. You know, |
| habit five, seek to understand. Okay, so you’ve |
| got to do it reasonably. Rule, that was rule |
| 10. Rule 11 says, respect the differences between |
| knowledge and mere personal opinion. by giving |
| reasons for any critical judgments you make and |
| so that reason again comes into that status no |
| difference between knowledge and personal opinion |
| so you’ve got to identify is that just an opinion |
| he has they have has that religious base or is |
| it actual knowledge and that’s why agnostic is |
| the word i i really love that word I don’t have |
| a knowledge of that. I don’t know exactly what |
| knowledge is. That’s why we’re trying to question |
| this. What are correct principles? What’s our |
| knowledge base of the correct principles without |
| question? Okay. Knowledge, like I know this. |
| Or we talked about truth. What is the absolute |
| truth behind it? Is there one? Because everyone |
| has their subjective truths, their subjective |
| knowledge, but the absolute correct principles |
| are what we’re looking for. How do you parse |
| those out? Where do you find them? How do you |
| prove it scientifically? And, you know, we talked |
| about the first part of this book is just a scientific |
| exposition on effectiveness. How do you prove |
| that it’s more effective is you just test it. |
| That must have been a correct principle because |
| it worked. This is the seventh time it’s worked. |
| So it must be valid. It must be. And it’s never |
| broken down. It’s never been bad. Win -win has |
| always worked for me. And then you have that |
| statement until it hasn’t. That’s what you’re |
| hoping for is it’ll never have a, until it stops |
| working, until it doesn’t work. And I guess it |
| could not work sometime. Depends on who you’re |
| talking to. Because if they have a different |
| paradigm that you’re going up against, you can’t |
| get to the, that’s what he says also in the final |
| writings here, in making it work, the inside |
| -out process. You can’t do the outside -in. You |
| can’t do public victory if you don’t have private |
| victory first. And you can’t go to a public victory |
| with someone who doesn’t have private victory. |
| If they don’t have a solid bounce they’re on, |
| there’s not going to be a course. You know, that’s |
| the no deal. He says you have win -win or no |
| deal. You run into a no deal if that person isn’t |
| the right way. They can’t talk the way you’re |
| trying to talk. Yeah, if they have any of the |
| other things, win -lose, lose -lose, just lose, |
| just win, you know, they’re… there’s not going |
| to be a win -win. So it has to be no deal. From |
| your, like, if you’re in there, it has to be |
| no deal. Your business, your teaching, your education, |
| whatever it is you’re working on, no deal is, |
| and what do you do with those no deal people? |
| I don’t know that that was, what do you think |
| he suggested you do with someone when you have |
| a no deal? You just leave the relationship. So |
| that’s the same thing. Win -win or no deal. Let’s |
| see. It would be better not to deal than to live |
| with a decision that wasn’t right for us both. |
| And that’s the way people talk about it. It’s |
| just not a good fit. Your company and my company |
| is just not a good fit. We’re not going to work |
| together. You know, your product, me buying your |
| product, it doesn’t seem a good fit to me. So |
| I’m just going to… You just don’t have a business |
| relationship. It’s not there. And there’s plenty |
| of people in the world that you don’t have business. |
| dealings with or your communication dealings |
| or you don’t even know them right you don’t even |
| know them it’s no deal by default yeah and there’s |
| no reason to do that you got these people that |
| are gregarious and gregarious is that the right |
| word for it that talk to anybody just go into |
| a store and you talk to everybody you run across |
| and they’re trying to they’re just outgoing that |
| way if you’re not feeling it you don’t have to |
| say hi back to them i mean they’re They’re trying |
| to infect people with this friendly attitude. |
| But if they find someone that’s just a grump, |
| they won’t necessarily badger that person. That’d |
| be the wrong thing to do. The right thing to |
| do would be, oh, it’s like unconditional love. |
| We talked about that. You can’t share love. You |
| can’t give love to someone and make them receive |
| it. Give them love. They receive it. That’s their |
| choice. And it bounces off and there’s no deal |
| there. There was not an exchange of love in that |
| case. So you’re just not exchanging. okay respect |
| the differences possible judgments you can make |
| of books when you’re reading them the author |
| is uninformed that there’s some piece of information |
| he missed and maybe i think in this work he did |
| he did keep his paradigm the whole way through |
| he didn’t treat it and it wasn’t his purpose |
| to treat it from a an agnostic or a atheistic |
| point of view he he did it as a full theist god’s |
| Given these rules, let’s follow God’s rules. |
| Yeah, even though he didn’t explicitly say this |
| is God’s plan, we know his history. In the index, |
| God is mentioned once. At least he mentioned |
| him. Let’s see. It’s after where I’m reading |
| in. Inside out again on the last. personal note. |
| Oh, it says right here, I believe that correct |
| principles are natural laws and that God, the |
| creator and father of us all, is the source of |
| them. Okay. Right. So he does specifically state |
| his position and say, that’s the way I wrote |
| this book. His book was written just for that, |
| just that way. Yeah. What I believe to be the |
| source of correct principles. That’s okay. I |
| mean, so yeah. That’s his belief. And he’s stating |
| it as a belief, not a knowledge. Yeah. Uninformed. |
| Perhaps he’s uninformed of any other way to have |
| a belief system. He didn’t write this from any |
| other belief system but his. The other one is |
| misinformed. And you could state that because |
| if you believe that belief system is faulty or |
| in error, then you could say he’s just misinformed. |
| It’s reasonable that he comes up with all these |
| ideas based on that misinformed position that |
| he’s in. It just makes no sense. This book is |
| pretty logical. Yeah, I don’t think he’s illogical. |
| It follows. If there’s a step missing, if you |
| could identify a step missing, I don’t know that |
| he missed a step. He is talking about that, where |
| we put it inside the model. He’s talking about |
| between thought and action. That’s it. He doesn’t |
| talk circumstance. He doesn’t talk results necessarily. |
| He’s talking, this is your personal win. And |
| the author is incomplete. So we could say this |
| author, this book is, well, incomplete. It’s |
| complete to the point that he did it. I mean, |
| it could have, if he were still alive, it could |
| have, what do you call those that come after? |
| Sequel. Sequels. It could have other books, other |
| things that you could add onto it. We could add |
| a book that talks more about the misinformed |
| and uninformed concept. of these this work right |
| didn’t he write like the eighth habit or something |
| wasn’t that a book yeah there’s the eighth habit |
| and if i were in my normal office i would have |
| it right there the eighth habit is what is the |
| eighth habit i think it’s just habit is what |
| it is it’s habitually doing something is the |
| eighth habit the eighth habit is having a habit |
| having realizing it’s a habit yeah let me see |
| It’s not in the back of my book. There’s other |
| books listed here. Read more, but The 8th Habit |
| isn’t one of them. The 8th Habit is find your |
| voice and inspire others to find theirs. Your |
| voice, the way that you touch the world and inspire |
| others to touch the world as well. Yeah, so that |
| was a sequel. Find your voice. So once you know |
| how to win -win, find how you’re going to use |
| that to better the world and encourage everyone |
| else to better the world too. Be infectious. |
| Bye. There was one other little bit at the end |
| of that. Yeah, no, that’s it. So your arguments |
| come after you understand, fully understand what |
| they say. We’ve demonstrated the use of this |
| book and the usefulness of this book in our conversations |
| over the last eight weeks. Yeah, as we’ve been |
| reading it. Everyone, every conversation has |
| leaked in information from this book as we’ve |
| been going through it. Yeah. And now, because |
| we’ve read it, every conversation from here on |
| is going to have some of it in it. Yeah, we’ll |
| be informed by this model, this information, |
| the rest of your life. If you read the book, |
| now, that’s the one thing I wanted to point out |
| that I did say. I’m surprised as I was reading |
| it that I found things that I’ve always thought |
| were just me. But I read this book 30 years ago. |
| When it came out, I read it. And it became important |
| to me in some respects. And it just became part |
| of me. And not to find a specific instance, but |
| things that I’ve always said that just came out |
| and said, well, this says it exactly that same |
| way. Maybe that’s where I got it from. Probably |
| is where I got it from. You internalize it, and |
| then it becomes you’re the source of it now. |
| Well, you know, and that’s what’s… as they’re |
| interviewing each other on podcasts and different |
| things. He said, I like the way you said that. |
| I think I’m going to steal that from you. And |
| the other guy says, yeah, well, I’ll reference |
| you first. I’ll just tell them where I got it |
| the first time. The second time, I’ll say I heard |
| it somewhere. And the third time, it’s just going |
| to be mine. Yeah, right. Okay. All right. That’s |
| the way that goes. It becomes yours after the |
| third time you tell somebody. First time, you’ll |
| remember who you got it from. The second one, |
| it’s just heard somewhere. What is it? I heard |
| last night a joke. I was watching. Who was it? |
| It was the guy, the ventriloquist. But he told |
| this joke, you know, when you die, how are you |
| going to do it? I want to die like my grandfather, |
| silently, not like all the other screaming people |
| in the car. And that was in the 70s or something. |
| I don’t know where I heard the joke from, but |
| maybe the joke did originate with him saying |
| that. Who knows? He heard it from somewhere. |
| And maybe he started it with this ventriloquist |
| act he had because it was like 76 or something |
| that he was doing this act. One of the earliest |
| things he did. It was interesting. I developed |
| that saying later, but it became part of me. |
| It just became one of those things that I’ve |
| said 20 times or so. And you think it’s yours, |
| but it’s not yours. It’s something you got from |
| somewhere else. And so it does build. Let me |
| close with that. That is the reason we’re doing |
| this, is so that we can inculcate some of these |
| ideas, all of these ideas, into our lives and |
| hopefully into yours as you’re listening. So |
| I want to appreciate the fact that you’re here |
| listening to this, that we’re together in a conversation, |
| and we’d recommend that you, or appreciate also, |
| encourage you to look at the website, doyouhaveaminutepodcast |
| .com, and that’ll have the connection to everything |
| else that we discuss. Look forward to hearing |
| from you. And we. We’ll welcome you next week, |
| which we talk about what? What’s our topic next |
| week? It’s a mystery. It’s a mystery. Yeah. Okay. |
| You’ll bring something up and then we’ll see |
| what we think about it. Yes. Okay. Until next |
| week, have a great day. Thanks. Okay. Good night. |
| Bye. |
Do you have a minute? 
Leave a comment