Jak asi víte, doména lide.cz patří pod křídla Seznam.cz. Zaujalo mě, jak tam dostáli heslu "Seznam - Najdu tam, co neznám" :-) A tak zobrazují, co neznají... (když to neexistuje)
PS: Kdo nevěří, ať si zobrazí libovolný profil s prázdnou nástěnkou. Být programátorem Seznamu.cz, zkusil bych if (příspěvků<1) document.write( "Zatím bez příspěvků. ").
Although this article is given from man's perspective, it is valid for women as well as long as appropriate and (hopefully) obvious modifications are done.
Once upon his life, every man asked the following two questions:
To maximize the probability of keeping her interested, you need to come up with a battle plan – a strategy. And then, you will watch her interest level changing, so that you will know how well your strategy works.
Without being aware of the situation, you would never know whether you at least stood a chance with her, or which mistakes you did.
He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot, will be victorious.
If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in peril.
Sun Tzu
There are people, who are willing to change their strategy, just because they did not succeed at the moment. Yet, they don't even ask, whether they actually could succeed. So, they go to another extreme as they change nothing.
If your strategy works successfully, she wants to stay with you. In such case, you head for a long-term relationship. This is a reliable indicator that efficiency of your strategy is greater than 50% - see Equation of Interest Level Motion.
Getting a bunch of phone numbers is not reliable. Some women just cannot say no to your face and other women seek someone just not to be alone. Having a sex at a first date is not a reliable indicator of method's efficiency as well. She could have slept with you just to make her ex angry, or she is simply a chippie. So, don't be a fool and don't think sky rocket high of your abilities, just because you had sex. In such case, your strategy does not matter to a significant extent. You just need to look good and behave yourself to her needs. But when she wants to be with you repeatedly and because of your personality, that's a different piece of cake. That's reliable and relevant.
Perhaps, a most reliable switch to man's brain is sex, beside a good meal. Set your priorities accordingly to your age:-) Notice how many dating techniques aim for getting her to bed ASAP. Beside the natural reaction to the possibility of having sex, there's an ill logic in background that interprets the following. You have sex, when she wants to stay with you aka when you have a long-term relationship. When you have a long-term relationship, you will have sex as well. But when you have sex, it does not mean yet that she wants to keep you for the long-term relationship. Set your primary goal first.
The long-term relationship with Miss Right stands for at least two months, when she had positive personal and relationship interest levels. During this interval, it is possible to test conditions of mutual physical attractiveness and to test, whether you have compatible thinking – i.e. whether the possibility of staying together exists. In other words, the relationship is possibly long-term one, if it lasts longer than two months under given conditions.
These two months act as a quick test as well. If your strategy works, she wants to stay with you and you don't need to perform any calculation. If it does not work, there is no reason to stick with it.
When things go wrong, don't go with them.
Elvis Presley
With my personal pre-selection and style, at the best I achieved 10% probability that approached woman is Miss Right with positive personal interest level in me and that she is available as well. The System [2] is more pessimistic – see Thirty Factor. It says that only one woman from thirty women will be available and Miss Right with high interest level. However, it says also that I won't like her so that I'll have to go for another thirty women. Simply said, once you've approached 60 women and none wants to stay with you longer than two months, you do something wrong. The greater number of approached women is, it is the greater probability that you use strategy that does not lead to your goal.
We talk about a probability that approached women is available for you, that she is Miss Right, that you understand each other and that you find yourselves mutually physically attractive. Moreover, that you both have positive personal interest level in each other. The list of required conditions is not a small one. Therefore, one cannot expect miraculous numbers once we pursue realistic estimation.
Once we would be concerned just about probability of getting her phone number, the probability would be greater than 10%. Being justified just with an e-mail address, it would raise even higher. And being delighted just by talking to her, we could claim almost 100%. However, none of these is a reliable indicator.
If anybody guarantees high success ratio, ask him, what exactly he guarantees. Ask him what the success exactly is and don't buy into vague terms. Don't take statements such as "you'll become more successful, you'll gain more self-confidence, women will like you more, you'll adopt the right manners, you'll become another, better man, etc."
Whenever a normal, clinically sane man buys a car, he is interested in motor, consumption, running meter, chassis and vehicle body in the first place. With statements such as "it will be new experience, a different drive feeling, you'll make a better impression", he would say good bye and buy nothing.
Those who cannot learn, and traps themselves in honey-pots, those' kingdom of heaven shall be.
Of course, you don't have to rely on interest level measuring only to determine strategy's effectiveness. You can analyze the strategy as well. Having correct input data and applying correct procedure, the analysis will match measured values of interest level.
I guess that we all realize that anybody, who relies on his friends only, perhaps never approached 60 woman strangers in his life, just because he might like them as potential girl-friends. Such people might tell us about their high success ratio, because they succeed e.g. at every second woman. Just put them into harsh environment such as street, and they will say good bye to their high success ratio very quickly. However, we are interested whether she will want to stay with us for at leas two months, regardless of the first contact.
By stating that at least one woman out of 60 women fits the requirements, it does not mean that you have to approach 59 women to get to this one. You can have the luck to meet her right at the first approach. It is probability; these are not absolute numbers.
Let her be 5th, 6th, 12th or 25th woman you approached. The order is out of your control and therefore you cannot reliably judge your strategy this way. It is necessary to differentiate between order and total number of approached women. Only after you cross the limit, 60, without reaching desired effect, then it is time to consider error either in the strategy, or in its completion.
Given probability is population's property. It is not about your capabilities. It describes percent occurrence. Once non-zero, you have a chance to keep her as you can meet her. Reversely, if you don't meet her, then you cannot keep her, apparently. Success ratio of keeping her is derived from effectiveness of used strategy.
For a month, you roam streets of a larger city and percent occurrence of Miss Right is 1 of 30. You approach one woman each day. On 12th day, you've got a phone number that resulted into a date. Just this time, she was Miss Right, but you were not able to keep her interest level high. So, you've started to study The Theory of Interest.
You had studied hard, yet you continued to approach one woman each day. Percent of occurrence stood the same. After 25 days, you had another day with another woman and roughly one week later, there was another date with her.
Degree of your knowledge and practice does not affect Miss Right percent occurrence in your environment. It affects the probability of keeping her interest level high.
Those, who ignore Statistics, are condemned to reinvent it.
Brad Efron
There are several indicators of positive personal interest level in you.
As you can see, there are 4 points per each date. For a particular interval, count how many of them she completed and divide it by maximum achievable points. The result is her average interest level in the given interval.
The rough estimation determines the interest level for positive numbers only. On the other hand, it is not a big problem as even Miss Right is useless for you without positive interest level.
Accuracy depends on the number of evaluated dates. For a single date, there is 25% tolerance – it is a problem of few input samples. For instance, a rejection of first date proposal illustrates this. However, with the knowledge that efficiency of a successful strategy is greater than 50%, we know that she would not reject second proposal with positive personal interest level (tolerance is 12,5%). With a successful strategy, you would not stagnate at zero.
Computing interest level per some interval, you don't get current value, but the average value. The longer interval is, then the greater a difference to current interest level could be.
Apparently, the rough estimation is not complex. So I hope that even a 15-years old teenager understands.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away.
Elvis Presley
Thanks to Scramjet, we know that interest level always changes, even if it is by an immeasurable difference. Therefore, we are unable to precisely tell current value of interest level. Once we say it, it has already changed. It is the same as with time. However, we can estimate the interest level with a particular tolerance. By comparing two sequential values, we determine its progress – raising or lowering.
The rough estimation suffers from little accuracy. Especially, we don't know optimum length of a time interval that would reflect her current interest level best. We need some fixed point – i.e. a confirmed interest level at a particular time. And we'll get this value from optimistic distributed simulation [108].
From this moment on, the further reading is designed for people, which would get familiar with the distributed simulation prior writing a comment.
Anytime we make any action, we never know what will happen to her interest level with 100% accuracy. We just assume a probable interest level change and accordingly to her reaction, a feedback, we make correction to our estimation of her interest level.
Initially, we reset all clocks and estimation of her personal interest level in us to zero. If she reacts positively, we take it as acknowledgement. Getting negative reaction, we consider it as an anti-message. If necessary, we perform respective rollback in the interest level estimation. Let us define positive interpretation of her interest level as a ratio of all acknowledgements to all messages, i.e. including anti-messages. Negative interpretation is defined as a ratio of anti-messages to all messages and multiplied by -1.
Two interpretations are needed because of –PIL → PIL–invariant [86, 87]. Until we get such anti-message that indicates her interest level under zero, we choose positive interpretation. Once this happened, we choose negative interpretation.
It is not necessary to interpret all anti-messages for the possibility of interest level under zero. It is still valid that successful strategy has efficiency greater than 50%. Once the interest level gets under zero, it leads the interest level estimation down to zero as well. Without interpretation, we do not estimate PIL, but RIL. This is given by the momentum that cannot be eliminated without the interpretation. The previous positive PIL values affect the average value over a given period. Fidelity of interpretation is conditioned by knowing the woman and the situation.
We can receive messages not only from her, but from other sources, e.g. her environment, as well. Therefore, it is desirable to assign weights accordingly to their reputation and trustworthiness. Just in case, it is better to run two simulations. One simulation will receive messages from her only and another one will process messages from other sources as well. The second simulation is to be used as an alarm to warn on possibly dangerous situations.
Reference value of her interest level is given to such time, for which there will be no anti-message (and thus no acknowledgment as well). As we met her, her interest level was not zero, yet we reset it to zero. This means that this method is iterative one and the estimation of her interest level gets more accurate as the number of reference values grows.
Estimation's accuracy is conditioned by a possible error given by one omitted, or badly interpreted, message. Thanks to reference values, it is a dynamic variable. With reference value, we could be interested in the speed of convergence to the real value of her interest level. This is a complex problem. Luckily, we actually don't have to solve it.
She is driven by her true interest level, not by our estimation. Thus, the estimation makes sense to know, what raises her interest level and vice-versa. Thanks to this, it is possible to develop a strategy and make decisions that would raise her interest level. +PIL++. So, we can adapt. But we should not do it at any costs.
I pretended to be somebody I wanted to be, until finally I became that person. Or he became me.
Cary Grant
If you desire a long-term relationship, it takes more than to know how to raise her interest level. You need to have compatible thinking.
JAs you can see, estimation based on distributed simulation generally works with any-rough feedback. Therefore, it is not limited to coarse granularity as to evaluate at the level of e.g. dates. Interpretation of messages de-facto means to assign weights to particular messages accordingly to the extent of the change. Going to extreme, we could assign weights to individual gestures of body talk.
It is individual, how much detailed simulation you can handle. There is one apparent use possible – Scramjet. Aka, it is about determining speed of her interest level increase.
We can even go so far that we don't need to learn any of existing strategies, because with such tool, we can derive one fast enough.
The more detailed simulation, the sooner you can adapt to her personality. Memory requirements are the problem. However, methods already exist to deal with it. I won't mention them because you don't actually need them for a first reason. For a second reason, I don't want to give so powerful tool into hand of people, who advertise different goals than those they pursue for real – using her for sex only, getting her money... while declaring e.g. a desire for a long-term relationship.
Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal.
Albert Einstein
Intuitively as any normal man, you can watch her reactions to a just-performed routine. Therefore, you can evaluate entire sequence of routines and evaluate overall success ratio.
Sometimes routine works, sometimes it does not. And we still consider the same type of woman. Advantage of this success evaluation lies in its simplicity. However, the simplicity has been paid with accuracy. Such evaluation considers woman as a combinatory automata – i.e. her interest level changes accordingly to your present actions only. Thanks to equation of interest level motion, we know that this is not true. Her interest level is affected by its previous values as well. And for this reason we need to know reference value of her interest level.
When evaluating your success ratio, you have to ask whether you even have had a real chance to succeed. Otherwise you would refine your technique with erroneous feedback. It would mean that you would not know whether you are actually doing better or worse. Just because you assumed that you could win, even if it was not possible.
Having several factors, it is possible to reduce out those, which do not affect the result. This is a trivial application of Bool algebra. However, there might be some dependencies, which are not clearly visible as there might be a temporal connection. For instance, when you cease to take her out on dates, someone else might start doing so. Development of such situation depends on her current interest level in you. So, a simple statistics, how many times of total number of times, introduces an error into your decision making.
I could start to expand statistics theories right now, but it can be said easily. Look and learn from her reactions to your actions. And use feedback only from those, with which you had real chance.
Rather than to rely on vague or misleading information, it is better to start from the scratch.
SomeoneCZ
Perhaps, as you needed an advice, you listened to somebody who would do better a job, just if kept his mouth shut. Although, he might gave you the information in a good faith that they are correct. Or, a deceiver might have supplied wrong information intentionally. Using of two simulations and trust reputation per information source let you to protect yourself from such errors.
Another possible source of error is your wrong interpretation of what have happened. The reference value and rollback allow you to deal even with such error. Just remember that you work with a time-compression.
But... what if she just plays indicators of positive interest level? Giving a watch-list, I'd just give them more detailed list of what to play to imitate the positive interest level. And we would be right back on the start. Luckily, although it is possible to forge the indicators, forging some of them is in a direct violation with deceiver's true intentions. Deceiver wants something – sex, money or it is something else. When someone really cares about you, he can do things he does not profit from. This is not deceiver's plan and therefore deceiver keeps his expenses at lowest needed minimum. He will try to deceive you by hiding his true goals. For instance, relationship will be declared as the official goal, while something pretty much else will take place – e.g. asking for money. Attempts for a comfortable relationship fail, once you try it with a deceiver. If you see this, remind yourself that there are no victims, just volunteers.
Nobody's perfect and even the best of deceivers will make a mistake eventually [109]. It is up to each of us, whether we will overlook it, or not.
However, the worst thing is, when you interpret events, which have not happened. Only a sane mind can prevent his.
Men become superstitious, not because they have too much imagination, but because they are not aware that they have any.
George Santayana
What I've described, it is possible to do it intuitively to some degree. So, why should we need the math model? We need it because it gives us an independent view without a psychological bias. Because of feelings, people don't want to see particular things. It is possible to deceive human mind with a number of psychological tricks [84, 89, 90, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109]. The math model has no feelings and therefore it is immune against such manipulation.
Prohibit the taking of omens, and do away with superstitious doubts. Then, until death itself comes, no calamity need be feared.
Sun Tzu
Take it as a sign of quality. I don't give you some well-formed, nicely looking sentences and a number of testimonies, which could have been forged pretty easily. No. I give you a tool, so that each of you can independently and objectively verify what I say.
Intuitively, we could assume that the more efficient the strategy is, the more it is likely that she would like to stay with you over two months. The catch is that the longer you stay together, goals, attitude and thinking compatibility gain on importance.
See "Dating Is a Game" article – if the strategy is successful, she wants to stay with you. And if you are together for several years, it looks like you can keep her. However, since there are divorces even under such conditions, it is not possible to guarantee lasting relationship just by staying together for some minimum period. The error is that people do not differentiate between personal and relationship interest levels.
Miss Right with positive interest level, and of adequate age, will take you into her long-term plans, which contain marital domicile and children. Miss Right will do it because of her positive personal and relationship interest levels. The problem is that other types of women can do it as well, while not having positive personal interest level in you.
If you want her with positive personal interest level, avoid women, which do not want to be with you just because of your personality and look, and never take back your ex. With ex, personal interest level of one of you either got under the zero, or the reasons for breakup still remain [2]. If you don't have her with personal interest level, do not wonder if she would prefer another man. You've asked for it.
The situation gets more complex, if she just said no as you approached her. If she is loyal and she was in a relationship at that moment, it could have been the damping factor – see Equation of interest level motion. OK everybody, just don't start making illusions that rejection does not matter. For a long-term relationship with Miss Right, you need both her interest levels to be positive. As you evaluate her interest level, take care which one you actually evaluate.
Let us show it on an example. Somehow, you managed to get a phone number of a woman in a relationship. And you want to take her over the relationship. So, you are nice to her, full of humor and time to time you send her SMS in the evening as you are being lead by the idea that her partner will not take it calmly. But you will stay calm all the time, because you are about to show her that you are better than her present partner. I'll make it short now... with this "I'm always here for you", you just show her that she does not need to respect you. So, if you manage to succeed with such tactics, you have her positive interest level. But the relationship interest level, not the personal interest level. If you are there for her no matter what, then she won't respect you for being a pushover.
You date her Interest Level; you marry her attitude.
DocLove
On could argue that it is not possible to get advertised results, while we have not mastered the method yet. Regrettably, such arguments result into defending of non-functioning strategies. One can always surrender to such fallacy that it will happen someday and the positive results will come.
Luckily to us, there is percent occurrence. Thus, you know the probability of having at least one date. Of course, if you don't manage to lower her interest level right during the first contact. But this won't happen, if efficiency of your strategy is over 50%. In such case, there will be an improvement.
Time needed to achieve long-term relationship differs with personal experience, knowledge, learning capabilities and number of approached women. But the improvement will be measurable. First, the ratio of having dates with women with positive personal interest level in you will grow. Next, the ratio of having dates with just one woman with positive interest level in you will grow.
Perhaps, I should state some maximum limit. Well, let me put it this way. If you are not an asocial individual, but you have e.g. zero experience and your head is full romantic wishes, then it is possible to start getting two dates with the same women in 3 months, if you manage to approach one woman per working day. It is important to set the maximum limit so you don't waste your time and efforts onto something, what does not work, although it has a persuasive presentation that tells the opposite [47, 84, 96]. Leaving out her attitude, Thirty Factor [2] says that 3 out of 30 will have positive interest level. This makes 9 dates in 3 months. And if you can learn fast enough from your mistakes, at least one of those 3 Misses Right should want to see you at least once more.
Having two dates with one woman in 3 months does not look like something great. OK, then. Just remember that this assessment has been done for people, who have a real problem with dating. And they should get those 9 dates just because of number of approached women. Therefore, there's the condition of having two dates with one woman. To her, going to second date because of positive interest level means that she has not lost it during the first date. And this is the problem of some people. Sometimes, it is enough just to stop making the most affecting errors. I cannot say always instead of sometimes because of self-confidence issue. So, the problem is solvable, although I won't claim this possibility for everybody.
Remember, it is impossible to help everybody. And when you mix The Theory of Interest with something pleasant for your ego, yet erroneous, do not wonder that you don't get the advertised results. Anyway, statistics and measuring her interest level will confirm this.
Sometimes, it seems to me that people master the necessary foundations thanks to The Theory of Interest. Yet, they start trying erroneous procedures then, while omitting that their success goes from the foundations – the reason why they still go over 51% with entire efficiency. If something particular did not work, human mind tends to forget related evidence because of viewed overall success [84].
I'm my own enemy
Yngwie Malmsteen
Does it seem to you that I've thrown all the feelings overboard, set hard limits and everybody, who does not fit, must go? No. The given computation of interest level estimation just characterizes the actual behavior. If you really care about somebody, you don't have to worry, because you will pass. But if you try to keep somebody, who does not like you for real, then you can find it out quickly. Cynically, I just add that this still does not have to be enough to let him go. But that's entirely your problem...
The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those, who have not got it.
George Bernard Shaw
Once the claims match reality,
it is possible to use math.
Just to add a small notice to fellow ladies, remember that real man won't start blabbering how much he loves you. Than to words, look at his actions.
alias "stalo se, protože se stalo tohle" je logický klam zodpovědný za řadu omylů, pověr a všelijaké zázračně fungující návody. Jde o nevědecké vyvozování vzájemné závislosti událostí, které se staly v nějakém pořadí.
Jde o to, že řada událostí se děje sekvenčně a mohou se mezi nimi vyskytovat náhodné korelace, ze kterých jsou potom omylem vyvozovány neplatné příčiny následků. A protože v oblasti vztahů a svádění se velmi často setkáváme s osobní předpojatostí pro některé závěry, je tak snadné vyvodit z korelací neplatné příčiny. Alias další logický klam zvaný cum hoc ergo propter hoc [116].
Stalo se A, pak se stalo B. Proto A způsobilo B, případně způsobí B. Je-li B nežádoucí efekt, můžeme se setkat se zpětným rozšířením. Vyhneme-li se A, pak se nestane B.
Pokud by skutečně šlo o implikaci, pak by to mohla být pravda. Jde-li však pouze o korelaci, uvedená úvaha pochopitelně nemůže v praxi fungovat.
Například, viděl, jak mu ukradli auto. Kdyby se tedy nedíval, tak by mu ho neukradli. Tento příklad je zcela zřejmý. Bohužel, případný klam získaný tímto postupem však může být daleko sofistikovanější – viz články Mýty o svádění (1-10, 11-12). A tím nebezpečnější, protože umožní lidem věřit v nesmysly a následně dělat chybná rozhodnutí.
V praxi můžeme vidět množství lidí, jak oslovují své potenciální protějšky zaručenými větami, dělají doporučené gesta řečí těla a nosí specifické doplňky (šaty, parfémy, cetky...). A když "zblbnou" úplně, tohle všechno podřídí učení nějakého guru. Neměli bychom tak zapomínat na možnost, že vidíme množství věřících lidí, jak odříkávají modlitby, žehnají se ochrannými gesty a nosí amulety pro přízeň svých bohů.
Vedle případů sebeklamů je pochopitelně možné zneužít obou logických klamů k imitaci odborníka na danou problematiku. Samozřejmě, ne vždy si držitelé Pinocchiových nosů takto komplikují život. Občas prostě post-hoc udělají líbivé prohlášení a řeknou, že je to známý a prověřený fakt. Podívejme se však už raději na konkrétní příklady.
Má-li zkřížené ruce, podle řeči těla se necítí pohodlně a její zájem proto neroste. Kdyby je nezkřížila, bylo by to v pohodě. Takže jí dáme něco podržet, aby je nemohla zkřížit.
Zkřížení rukou je pouze symptom a jde tedy o korelaci, nikoliv o implikaci. Tím, že zabráníme symptomu, aby se projevil, tak jsme neodstranili skutečnou příčinu a tudíž se následná událost stejně stane.
Viz článek ženy a psychologové. Opět jde o symptom, nikoliv o příčinu. Na rozdíl od předchozího příkladu je však zajímavý tím, že tento symptom může za určitých okolností začít fungovat i jako další příčina efektu, kterému se chceme vyhnout.
Proto je nutné si uvědomit, že bychom nejenom neodstranili spouštěcí příčinu, ale ještě bychom navíc potlačili indikátor, že je něco špatně.
Zoufalci se seznamují i na ulici. Někteří lidé však nedokážou napsat poutavý inzerát, nevěnují pozornost inzerátům, na které hodlají odpovídat, anebo prostě a jednoduše jejich písemný projev nestačí na "nezoufalý" protějšek, ač by ho jinak rádi. Nehledě na to, že když chcete opravdu inteligentní ženu/muže, to pak nároky na písemný projev stoupají opravdu značně. Navíc má příjemce více času věnovat se vaší zprávě.
Seznamování na Internetu dává vyniknout chybám, které by se jinak na ulici přehlédly, nebo vůbec neobjevily z důvodu časového omezení. A když na Internet nemáte, pak na vás zůstanou oni přísloveční zoufalci, kteří tyto chyby přehlédnou.
Uvedená pověra se také drží díky faktu, že oslovení po Internetu nestojí nesmělé lidi takové nervy jako oslovení neznámé ženy na ulici. A co? Pokud jim nejde o dopisovací známost, stejně budou její testy a exploity absolvovat naživo. Je náročnější udržet si tu jednu, než oslovit bůhví kolik neznámých. Proto je způsob, jak jste se seznámili, v tomto ohledu bezvýznamný a jde o to, zda si ji dokážete udržet.
Samozřejmě se uplatní i další faktory, jako např. počet populace dostupné na Internetu ve vašem regionu. Jak se říká, kde nic není, ani smrt nebere.
Aby si nepřipadala jako více, či méně, lehčí dívka, každá má údajně nějakou formu obrany, na které (od guru neškolení) muži selhávají.
Každá normální žena se sebeúctou odmítá muže, o které nemá zájem. A aby neranila jejich ego (co kdyby narazila na machra, který to neunese a vice-versa), tak si vymyslí nějakou přijatelnou krycí historku. Je zajímavé, že základ krycích historek je často velmi podobný, někdy dokonce identický. Proto je možné si udělat seznam nejčastějších, říkat věci jako "jó, tak na tebe zkusila tohle, to máš udělat tohle" a vůbec si hrát na odborníka. Někdy může být sebeklam natolik přesvědčivý, že tomu dotyčný radil sám o sobě skutečně i věří.
Na rozdíl od testů a exploitů jde o symptom – tj. ne o příčinu, ale o korelaci. A bojovat se symptomem je vám prd platné. Ale zase máte ten dobrý pocit, že jste pro to něco udělali a třeba i na sobě zapracovali.
Pokud by opravdu bývala byla měla zájem, tak by byla bývala vytrvale neodmítala. Ale zkuste to vysvětlit někomu, kdo to nechce vidět, protože mu na ní záleží. Anebo si nedokáže přiznat, že je cenou útěchy.
Nepřestala odmítat, protože ji přesvědčil, jak vyvozuje, ale protože došlo na příslovečného vrabce, jež je lepší holuba na střeše. Či-li, jde o korelaci mezi hledala a neměla nikoho lepšího na výběr (kdo by ji také chtěl). Z čehož by se dalo v nejlepším duchu logických klamů usoudit, že asi jen tak nikdo lepší není.
Její zájem se mění v závislosti na vašich akcích, jak si je interpretuje. Některé akce ho zvednou, jiné sníží. Pokud je např. po rande její zájem větší než na jeho začátku, někteří věří, že byl úspěšný celý postup.
Ve skutečnosti některé akce měly zvednout jejich sebevědomí, ale přitom snižovaly její zájem, který následně musely zvednout jiné z provedených akcí. Ale protože se zájem přes rande celkově zvýšil, všechny akce této sekvence jsou považovány za zvyšující její zájem. Což není pravda.
Tak vám podržela ještě ten večer. No, tak to jste fáááákt dobří. Anebo se dotyčná takhle chová zcela běžně. Raději se přeptejte se na venerologickém oddělení.
Jestli má zájem, tak vám pomůže, protože chce být s vámi. Je vcelku jedno, co jí povíte. Pravda, nějaké nároky na obsah oslovení sice jsou, ale nic velkého to není. V téhle fázi jde hlavně o to, abyste ukázali sebevědomí a nejlépe i smysl pro humor. Habých použíl vodborné hantýrko, už jsem viděl na streetu aproučnutej set otvírákem "Pojďte s námi". A šly, čísla se měnily, na sex hned nedošlo, ni prachy se nedolovaly. Ni meluzína mezi ušima nezaskučela...
Jestli jste se ptali, nějaký guru vám cosi poradil, jako volitelnou výbavu přihodil tunu hypotéz, a ono to vyšlo, tak si uvědomte, že to vůbec nemusela být jeho zásluha. V manuálu psychologické manipulace, Cold Reading [84], jsou tomuto efektu věnovány celé sekce.
Když pradávný pastýř hledal zaběhnutou kozu, náhlý poryv větru shodil kámen z menšího skaliska za nímž se jeho koza v klidu pásla. I z vděčnosti navršil dobrému duchu malý pomník z kamení a kdykoliv šel okolo, přidal další kámen. I ostatní začali obětovat a z ducha malého místa se stal mocný bůh s nespočetnými zástupy věřících, silných ve své víře.
Akorát, že kozy nikdy nepásli všichni, dneska ještě míň, zato odmítnutí v seznamování by se nejraději vyhnul každý...
Pověry v neobyčejné schopnosti a zázračné postupy vás zbavují kontroly nad vaším vlastním životem [119]. Když si neuvědomujete možnost, že mohlo jít jenom o shodu okolností, náhodu, symptom, korelaci, koincidenci… chováte se jako tupé ovce, které jejich pastýř oholí o vlnu.
Jak je vidět, celé se to nápadně podobá placebo efektu. Něco jste udělali, něco se stalo a proto to nebylo placebo. Či-li, opět to chce zdravý rozum alias kritické myšlení, konkrétní čísla a postupy a znalosti. Pochopitelně, ne znalosti nějakého guru, který tahá oslnivé informace jako kouzelník králíka z klobouku.
Nuže, abych nezklamal matematicky zdatnější čtenářskou obec, χ2. Jenomže, takový přístup vyžaduje zveřejnit naměřené hodnoty. Což je ovšem, nejspíš jenom náhodou, chronický nedostatek průkopníků zázračných metod líčených superlativy…
Nutnou podmínkou objektivního posouzení je, aby provedený test nebránil nalezení f(a, b, c) = f(a, b, not c).
Příkladem k počtu zoufalců na Internetu. Vedli jste si statistiku, kolikrát jste se seznamovali přes Internet a kolikrát z toho to byl zoufalec. A tak jste dostali odhad pravděpodobnosti, s jakou se na Internetu seznámíte se zoufalcem. Ale nyní přidejte do svého rozhodování další proměnnou, a sice zda inzerát, na nějž odpovídáte, obsahuje formulace jako "odepíšu všem", či "vzhled není důležitý". Pravděpodobnost seznámení se zoufalcem vám najednou prudce klesne.
Příkladem k oslovení. Nějaký guru vám poradí zaručený způsob, jak ji oslovit na ulici. V zájmu testování ho zkusíte 10x s úspěšností 7/10. Pro nekriticky uvažujícího věřícího jde o příjemně uspokojivý výsledek. Chytrý člověk však zkusí dalších deset oslovení, každé jiné, a dosáhne úspěšnosti 6/10. Nedejbože, kdybyste jedno z nich zkusili 10x a vyšlo vám 8/10. Je zajímavé, jaké úspěšnosti se dosáhlo (když jsem to zkoušel) s náhodně zvoleným oslovením. Evidentně tak platí, že ač nějaké nároky na oslovení jsou, není to nic velkého. Tvrzení guru o zaručených oslovovacích postupech tím pádem můžeme s čistým svědomím ohodnotit nenulovým počtem Pinocchiových nosů. Ostatně, on na to stačí i selský rozum, když si uvědomíte, že tihle guru mají kolektivně na svědomí už stovky takhle zaručených oslovení.
Po psychologické stránce věci, autoritou [103] schválený postup má totiž potenciál zafungovat jako berlička, která vám zvýší sebevědomí. Kníže Soběslav si také nechal poslat pro praporec svatého Václava a husité zpívali Ktož sú boží bojovníci. Mimochodem, nezvyšovala Vlasta morálku povídáním o tom, že nemohou prohrát, protože bojují za spravedlivou věc?
Čím větší autorita [103], či celebrita, má na svědomí prohlášení s nenulovým počtem Pinocchiových nosů, tím větší pravděpodobnost, že se k němu kriticky nevyjádří dostatek lidí. V praxi tak můžete potkat někoho, jak vševědoucně vykládá předaná životní moudra. Že jde ve skutečnosti o vágní tvrzení, sebenaplňující se proroctví a další psychologické finty, to vůbec netuší...
Většina lidí však nebude psychologické finty studovat do detailu, takže alespoň tři základní obranná pravidla:
Ani "zaručeně úspěšný postup"
nemusí být nic víc než jen pověra.
Obrázek: Simpsonovi - Radost ze sekty
Kvalita článků na Internetu se různí, stejně jako jejich věrohodnost. A některé obzvláště vypečené článečky by horkokrevné hlavy jistojistě neváhaly označit za dílo podvodníkovo. My rozšafnější však již víme, že také může jít o projev neznalosti, hlouposti, či syndromu pravého věřícího [96, 106]. A proto není korektní označit šmahem za lež cokoliv.
Z právě uvedených důvodů tímto zavádím příslušné hodnocení, které jsem nazval Pinocchiův index – PI. Udává se v jednotkách SI, konkrétně v nosech – [ns] (z českého nos). Rozsah stupnice je 0 ns až 5 ns. Vyjadřuje míru věrohodnosti informace – nula nosů je zcela věrohodná, 5 nosů je už totální blábol. Užívejte tedy Pinocchiův index s rozvahou.
Abychom měli lepší představu, uvedeme si příklady klamu, jehož Angličané zovou Straw-Man Fallacy. Jde o argument proti někomu, který je založen na překroucení tvrzení toho, jehož kritizuje. Například, podsunete mu něco, co nikdy neřekl, a pak to vyvrátíte.
Tak jsem jí za 5 dnů napsal smsku, jak radil Someone, a ona mě odmítla.
PI: 2 ns
Jednak jsem nepsal psát smsku, ale volat, a jednak jsem nikdy netvrdil, že půjde jenom proto, že byla cca týdenní pauza.
Podle TZ na ženy platí jenom jedna věc a nikdo neví která.
PI: 4 ns
Opět - nikdy jsem nepsal, že na ženy platí jenom jedna věc. A jak bych asi taky mohl, když bych nevěděl, co na ně vlastně platí – tj. že je to alespoň jenom jedna věc. Naopak, psal jsem toho víc, co je třeba k udržení kladného osobního zájmu. Sebevědomí, vzhled, který se jí líbí, smysl pro humor...
TZ něco neobsahuje, má zúžený pohled na věc, atd.
PI: 2 ns
TZ není žádná slibotechna, a proto má jasně nadefinovaný definiční obor i obor hodnot. To znamená, že ví, o čem mluví, a není postavena na vágních tvrzeních, která můžete napasovat na cokoliv. Tím pádem se v ní nedaří pověrám, které se dají rozvíjet donekonečna.
Podle TZ není sebevědomí důležité a proto se s ní budete chovat jako hodní chlapci, ze kterých budou leda kamarádi.
PI: 5 ns
PI: 0 ns
Obrázek: Pinocchio ve filmu Shrek 3.
Have you ever heard about The Marriage Equation? I did not until few moments ago. Compare Equation of Interest Level Motion with slide number 11. I like the idea of stable attractor. Well guys, it is true once more - if you really know what you talk about, you can talk in exact numbers and within range of a valid math-model.
All that New Age fluff talk might motivate,
but won't solve it.
Jak se traduje, lidé v oblasti bývalého Sovětského svazu vymírají díky přílišné konzumaci alkoholu. A přesto někteří přežívají. V praxi nám zde pracuje přírodní výběr, jeden z nejsilnějších nástrojů evoluce. Přežijí jen ti neschopnější. Ti kteří umějí spalovat alkohol tak dobře, že vydrží déle než ostatní.
Spalování alkoholu není nic jiného než přeměna hmoty na energii a zbytkovou hmotu, která se vyloučí. V oblasti se však bezprostředně po výbuchu nenašly žádné zbytky alkoholu. Čili, nějaké množství alkoholu bylo přeměno pouze na energii. Viz E=mc2 Speciální teorie relativity Alberta Einsteina.
Nápoj se považuje za alkoholický, je-li v něm více než 7,5 gramu alkoholu na litr. Výpočet gramů alkoholu v alkoholickém nápoji jsou procenta krát 8. Např. Tuzemský rum z Božkova se svými 40% v objemu jednoho panáka odpovídá 16 gramům alkoholu. 1 gram hmoty odpovídá energii v hodnotě 21 kilotun TNT. Tj. panák rumu odpovídá 336 kilotunám TNT. V láhvi je 20 panáků. To už dělá 6,72 megatun TNT. A pak tu máme takové pití jako je Stroh a samohonka, kde to vytáhneme ze 40 na 80 procent. Čímž dostáváme 13,44 megatun TNT – nejpravděpodobnější síla Tunguzského výbuchu.
Co se tedy vlastně stalo? Po letech genetického křížení si evoluce přirozenou cestou vychovala jedince, který dokázal naprosto perfektně spalovat alkohol. Jenomže, hned na prvním mejdanu, kdy do sebe dostal zhruba litr samohonky, se tato vývojová větev ukázala jako slepá a následky pocítil celý svět.
2150 km2 bylo zničeno, 80 miliónů stromu poraženo (místní zelení by vyhlásili státní smutek, kdyby přežili), na několika místech bylo zaznamenáno zemětřesení o síle 5 Richterovy stupnice, fluktuace atmosférického tlaku byly patrné až v Anglii, kde jste si stejně jako v Asii mohli číst noviny v noci jako při denním světle.
Moraváci, moc dobře víme, na kolik procent si tu slivovičku pálíte. Tož si déte bacha, aby se události neopakovaly. Apeluji na vás.
1. duben
Obrázek: Stromy poražené Tunguzkým výbuchem. Pořízeno roku 1927 Kulíkovo expedicí.
