The Renaissance Man

After studying from his podcast for a while, and cross-referencing self-improvement advice from multiple sources, I stopped watching his videos entirely. Some critiqued the studies he cites, and how those aren't really reliable. But I'm not competent enough to give an opinion on that, just know that cherry picking studies is a real thing. I also don't want to criticize his morals. He seems a real nice guy that wants to do good in the world. What I want to criticize is his advice. From my understanding, one of the big reasons he's gotten so popular is that he presented a bunch of quick fixes as the new secret solution to life's problems. The supplement, the shower, the routine, the nutrition timing, the measuring this and that. If you pay attention, you see how the vast majority of his advice can literally be applied in 10 minutes. And you're done. How convenient. The problem is that obviously (if you watched Leo you should know), this is far from the root of the problem. And the problem with that is that people, looking at a 2 hour episode, think that that's the full picture. And it obviously fails, as the mind and body not only is very complex, but discomfort and long hours of work is something that can pretty much never be escaped. While what he says may be true scientifically, he fails in making the priorities clear, if you really want to solve a problem. It's like a nutritionist talking 10 minutes about calorie balance (or omitting it completely) and 50 minutes about supplements. The supplements may be proven to be useful but they influence like 4% of the actual dieting results! For example, for sleep I feel like he doesn't give enough credit to how much psychology plays a role in insomnia. You can take all the sunlight you want, wear all of the blue light blockers, take all the magnesium and theanine, but if you're stressed as fuck, good luck sleeping. And guess what, there's no quick fix to not being stressed as fuck. I understand how the "quick fixes" will be much more marketable, but I want to warn you, Huberman shows you FAR from the big picture. I don't judge him nor blame him. Conflicts of interest happen all the time when delivering value. I just stopped watching him and I'm curious about your experience. Before defending him, ask yourself: Have you really fixed the problem thanks to his advice? I'm talking fixed not slightly improved. What fixed your shitty sleep really? What made you strong and resistant really? What made you a master in your craft really? It's likely a shit ton of discomfort and consistency, something that Huberman never mentions, or if he does, he doesn't stress it enough, even though that's the catalyst for 95% of the progress you will make.

Lol theories on why Leo is absent... the ego is very damn crafty with its distractions 🤣

I don't know if videos will do the job. It's not that easy to change a person's mind. Also, I feel like this dopamine thing is getting a bit too inflated. I see the problem more in a philosophical way, basically you're wasting your life. That's a point that could become apparent to anybody. At the same time, if the parents don't see that... it may mean they need to solve this problem for themselves first.

In a way it's the same problem with spiritual teachers. You have no way of knowing if a teacher is enlightened, the same way you can't know if George is dreaming.

@rachMiel I feel like for another while technological development for entertainment (and stuff that replaces direct socialization like social media) is going to become more and more compelling, making it harder to not get distracted, and also harder to feel the obvious need for something human, as technology becomes better and better at fulfilling that need. Basically, the effect we have now compared to 15 years ago, just amplified. I didn't do some super contemplation about this idea, but I feel like technology won't ever be able to replace the connection you have with other people and the real world. But, if it becomes socially acceptable enough, it could become something like wage slavery, where building something of your own would be too risky and uncomfortable, so you end up settling. The comparison would be settling for a life of comfort and sophisticated AI, rather than going through the uncertain process of building valuable social connections. So, I think it's possible that weaker people will end up settling just like with slave jobs, but that those people will never be happy, just like someone who spends 8 hours a day on a slave job. They will accept the compromise without even looking at truth in its face. I don't know if that can be called a relationship. I think people would be ashamed to say they're in a relationship with an AI. It would be like being proud of watching porn instead of having sex. Everybody knows the real reason is that you can't get sex, so you just shut up about the porn lol. For this reason I think the wage slavery metaphor may be a decent prediction when talking about settling, with the addition of some shame.

@universe Yes he ultimately uses it as a map to understand what to let go of. He describes it as "levels of transformation" but I also interpreted it as emotions, in particular as the main driver pushing you forward to improve yourself. Are you driven by anger, fear, purpose, etc. I feel like the model has something to it, but that it lacks some detail. If I explore the other resources mentioned in the other replies and experiment for myself I will probably be able to fill in the gaps. My main question was about how accurate of a development map it was.

Thanks everyone I'll do some cross-referencing in the future and experiment a bit. In his videos he says this exact model is his, but he often mentions David Hawkins and others. He doesn't pretend to have discovered this stuff all by himself. I'm interested in understanding the growth process, I find it both useful and very fascinating. I don't really care about where I'm at, it's of no use after all, only adds one layer of perspective I don't need

Ok so from my understanding: Visionary = thinking outside the box, having a vision 100x what's thought possible, pioneering. Ambition = more related to the drive, to wanting to do something special. Only ambition = grindset and stuff like that Only visionary = great ideas but more of a dreamer and less of an achiever (?) Both = the highly successful people Leo mentioned in his reply It's a bit simplistic, but did I get the gist of it at least? Obviously there are many facets and a trait doesn't guarantee nor explain success or every behavior you have.

6'10 (208cm) with 47" (120cm) vertical jumps shoulder to rim and touches top of the backboard.

@CARDOZZO Thanks, I'll try again for sure in the future.

@CARDOZZO Logically, it was great. I removed social media, Video games, and so on months ago. But if I take away everything , after I'm done working I'm too tired to engage in an activity (at least for 30-60 minutes), and I feel like I have no outlet after the day of work. And even when I do, it's a bit forced. I mean there are 24 hours in a day, when you remove every form of consumption (which is my goal, it's a waste of my life), I'm left with a lot of time where I'm too tired to do anything but I also can't consume anything. Were you able to just go all day long walking and writing?

Would you say visionary = very high ambition? Visionary may be more inclined towards pioneering while ambition towards "just" success. But I feel that if you're very ambitious you can logic your way to becoming a visionary. Not sure about the transition though. I always had decent ambition, and once I started to think for myself and shedded some of my culture of pursuing a career, it came natural to aim for the stars. But at the same time I felt an incredible pull towards innovation and pioneering, more so than success. Didn't have to logic my way through, it was a gut feeling for me. I still don't think you can be a visionary without ambition, so breaking it down like this may be helpful to understand it.

@CARDOZZO How did you manage the boredom and having no distraction outlet? I tried and was stressed AF when removed everything.

Scared of bubbles?

I'd do the same as @Osaid, sorry. If there was a third, more risky option for myself to try and save both, maybe it would be different. But with 50-50 I'm picking my daughter, of course.

Contemplate every word of that series. Don't skip a single word! Selective attention is an ugly beast. - It being hard as fuck is a feature, not a bug. It's normal, and it's how it's supposed to be. It sucks, but more people are going through this shit than you think. Many don't even have the courage to ask for advice like you did. - Women have different problems than men. Leo talks about it in the how to get laid series as well. It's victim mindset. Men have no idea of the struggles women face, and women have no idea of the struggles men face. On average. And I'm no feminist, trust me. I've gone through the Andrew Tate women-hating phase, and it's just a coping mechanism to justify your lack of success. "women are bad, that's why". But it just creates conflict, and makes you a fucking pussy in the eyes of a woman, too. Many of those red-pill influencers understand very well that the weak spots of their audience are. While some of them act from good intentions, there's a conflict of interest between giving just solid advice, vs demonizing women and making them feel like they "awakened you to the truth", given you the "red pill". That way they're viewed by their audience as the savior of the "poor, misunderstood men", and how convenient is that? Oh, great, it's not my fault then. Much less painful this way, right? - Also, people have their own concerns, and don't bother too much with your cringy episodes. When they go home they will spend exactly zero seconds thinking about that episode. It's not easy to internalize this to the point where you act from that perspective, but start to appreciate this. You can likely recall times when others acted weird around you, and you just forgot about it within a week (or more likely, 10 minutes). Of course you can burn some bridges, but many, many times your mind will amplify 100x. - Another great resource I suggest you read is "The way of the superior man" by David Deida. Try to read it from an non-judgmental perspective towards women. Read it as if you were studying the behavior of rats, completely impartial, and just curious. Whenever you make a judgment about women, ask yourself: Do I really KNOW this to judge it? Do I have that much actual experience talking to the opposite sex to know it's true? Could it be that I know jack shit about what goes on in a woman's mind? Did I ever try and behave like a man the way it's described in the book, or did I always live from the perspective of a boy? I still have a shit ton to work to do still, but I'll tell you what made me get closer to an actual solution. Try to deeply think about what I'm about to say. Evaluate it for yourself, don't believe me. Try to recall episodes where this may be true. Actual life scenarios. But it might be bullshit as well, that's why I want you to think critically. There's a ton of stuff in this post, I hope parts don't get lost, it's all very meaningful to me. - First, it really helped to understand how many insecurities women have, and how much the majority of them are less developed than I am (maybe it's an overcompensation from a previous lack of self-esteem), since they never did the amount of personal development work I did. And the same goes for men. You see the average man, and how mediocre his life is. What makes you think women are any different? They're not. Maybe socially they will be ahead of you, but seeing how you might be crushing them in terms of direction in life, knowledge of your mind, and so on can help taking them down from a pedestal that's purely imaginary. Just being in this forum makes it far more likely that you're ahead in development compared to 80% of the women you talk to, if not more. - Second, it was a mind-shattering moment to understand how women attraction works. So fucking counterintuitive. Imagine it like this... Recall times where you felt respect for another man. Respect and admiration. For his courage, integrity, boldness, for being able to do the things you aren't able to. You can FEEL this respect, this admiration. Well, that's sexual attraction for women. This comparison may not be perfect, but it's quite spot on actually. I realized I had zero clue about this, and once I realized it, I finally had a way to understand the female mind for fucking once. NOW it started to click. Now I could see how some guys could pull up girls. Now I could see how they were repelled by my neediness. Imagine this, would you admire a man who follows every order you give him, allows you to abuse him, who asks for you to solve his problems, who has no courage to do anything? IF you wouldn't admire him, that equals to a woman not being attracted. Now imagine a man who you would admire, and magine being a woman and wanting to have sex with him. Also, would you admire a bully, someone who's arrogant? An asshole? Hmm, not really. But you would still respect it more than a pussy dork. But if you wouldn't admire him, it means that's not the way to attracting a woman. A woman who's with an asshole has settled. Because she has flaws too, as I said in point 1. Don't be fooled into thinking treating a woman badly will attract her. It's like saying you admire a bully. You might stick around him rather than being alone, but that's not a leader you'd want.

https://actualized.org/insights/leos-geography-challenge So simple, yet so genius. I love the gamification aspect of it. The idea can be applied in so many ways. That's why I'm making this post. If you guys have ideas, post them below. The process: 1) Pick an area where you're ignorant and unaware 2) Research and make a list of concepts to explore related to that area 3) Make the commitment to explore them one by one for example with a documentary 4) Optional - Gamify the process by scraping, checking off, or in a way tracking the progress in a fun way Some ideas that came to mind: mental illnesses, engineering processes, human body systems, countries in relation to (politics, lifestyle, jobs, religion), history phases, subcultures, schools of thought & methods.

@Mileyofpink Have you spent 15 minutes in silence just trying to figure this out? Just eyes closed, with your mind. I'm just curious of what your mind would come up with from your perspective. If you haven't, I suggest you try. Maybe nothing happens, but maybe something happens.

What you're after is understanding, not emulating. And emulating their behavior for a while won't ruin your life either, instead it could teach you some lessons, as you're exploring uncharted territory by behaving in different ways. As a disclaimer, I'm no expert at this endeavor, so contemplate everything I say for yourself, don't blindly trust what I'm saying, I could just be plain ignorant. But I thought about what you're saying deeply, so I think at least my advice is good food for thought. It's not an easy process, but this formula might help you... Take every experience that didn't yield the result you desired as a trigger to start a sort of scientific process. This can be done on paper. 1) Recall the full timeline of the experience, trying to pull out as much data as possible. No judgment, no solution. As if you were documenting the process in third person. The more data, the better. 2) Read through all of that. What could've caused your failure? It may be multiple factors. Try one at a time. 3) You've hypothesized your root cause. Now hypothesize an experiment. Meaning a different behavior, response, attitude, whatever. "try harder" is not an experiment. 4) Repeat the cycle after having done an experience with the new hypothesis, now evaluating it. Can't expect a different response if the input you give is always the same! This is called Kolb's experiential cycle, if you want to do some more research on it. ALSO, while that process is extremely valuable, some basic understanding of how first impressions and communication works can be crucial. Two things that completely shattered old beliefs I had and made me make huge leaps forward were "understanding what women are attracted to" and "understanding how being funny works". Leo has some videos on these topics, and I suggest you don't watch them lightly, but instead you soak in everything that's in there. First, you won't and you can't get along with everyone. Don't expect that, don't have that as a goal. At the same time, too much seriousness will repel anybody. Men and women. Even people who love talking about philosophical topics will feel a pull towards less serious fun after a while. Again, I suggest you watch Leo's videos on how to get laid (he talks about this and how it influences communication positively for men and women, not just romantic relationships). He makes the example of how he had to teach himself how to become less serious and care more about small talk, as a person who doesn't give a fuck about that. No forum post will be able to go in depth enough. That's why I'm referring you to Leo's videos. Other than that, to summarize, there's the experiential cycle which is a great tool to coach yourself, And trying to understand how communication works rather than throwing shit at the wall randomly. What are the principles for a good interaction? What does it mean to be funny? (it's not about scripted jokes, or anything scripted) Where is the other person coming from? Hope some of this helps

I would probably describe social calibration as intuitively being able to calibrate your communication based on your reading of the situation. For example, you could tease a friend in ways that would be terribly offensive for a stranger. Well, how do I know when it's appropriate then? When does the stranger become a friend? But if I like saying dark jokes and I'm keeping them to myself, isn't that not being authentic? 1) You determine when it's appropriate through mindful experience. Those two are carefully picked words. Meaning, you get yourself out there, but you watch closely the interaction (in your head). Over time patterns will develop and you develop the natural skill of social calibration. Paying attention to other people that get more positive responses, if you have the chance to, will also help a lot in developing that natural sense. 2) An authentic person doesn't behave in the same way in every situation. Again, social calibration. But when is it social calibration and when is it anxiety? Social calibration comes from common sense, anxiety comes from fear. These teachers take social calibration for granted (probably), and when they talk about authenticity they mean removing that fear of being yourself, which if not solved leads you in behaving like a polite robot rather than a relatable human.

@John Iverson Often through contemplation you can give structure to all of the dots you already have in your mind. All of your experience, which is unique, when contemplated upon, may result in insights that could greatly improve your life. Contemplation is just focused thinking on a question/topic. It was never implied for the results to be the same for everybody. What you originally come up with through contemplation will stick to your memory much deeper than what you hear or read. So there's an advantage in terms of learning. And finally, (although I'm not going into every advantage of the practice, nor into the spiritual field where I have no experience), contemplation fosters creativity and original thinking, compared to making assumptions blindly. Understanding will be much greater Minfulness + Experience and then contemplation = Speedrunning development

@Anon212 thanks for your update

Thanks everybody for your answers.

I struggle to understand how I can truly be intrinsically motivated by stuff I already have. Or positively motivated, if you want. The main example for me is health. I'm in my 20s, I work out, I eat healthy, but that's because I'm an athlete, so I'm positively motivated by that athletic performance. When we're talking about stuff like skin care of brushing my teeth regularly, I struggle, unless I seriously remind myself of the damage I will have to deal with. Being in my 20s I don't have wrinkles nor I have teeth problems, so I just can't learn to be positively motivated in these aspects. Question So, is it possible to be positively motivated towards something you already have, and that you're just going to maintain if you do everything right? Is negative motivation, reminding yourself about the long-term downsides necessary forever? I have succeeded in creating strong habits where I previously struggled a lot, so it's not like I'm a total victim of this mechanism. The biggest one was procrastination. What has helped me there was probably just the repetition. Forcing the behavior over and over reduced the conscious effort, and now I can just work by myself 7 hours a day total, with breaks not included. I thought that was impossible 3 years ago. My conclusion & hypothesis Even if I struggle to practically understand how to replicate this predictably, I think it may be possible to be intrinsically motivated by stuff you already have and can just maintain and not improve. For health, it could be a mix of self-love and creating an identity of somebody who takes care of himself and strives to be the best as a massive priority, just because it's right, and not because of the damage you're doing to yourself long-term. For other scenarios, it would probably be the same. The positive motivation would be to be aligned to your top noble values, without needing a specific prize. Am I on the right track? What's your experience?

@hyruga Yea I think it's more about sharing it on YouTube vlogs or in a forum like this one that concerns me. I probably have phrased this thread the wrong way, after having contemplated about this "issue" more deeply.